Written in advance: I have no intention of getting involved in public disputes; I write this article simply because I still hold a bag of $PARTI, and founder pengyu's article provides a clear explanation and plan for the project's business model, positively contributing to community development and stabilizing token prices, aligning with my interests. Therefore, I engage in visual deconstruction and share some of my own views.

➣ Team: Triple Composite Identity

- Although the benefits are greater than now, if it is not convenient for the future, it will not be done.
- (Records of the Grand Historian · Long Benefits)

- @0xpengyu, as the founder of @ParticleNtwrk, personally purchased at a market price of 3.2 million USD.$PARTI And proposed the team's 'Builder + Founder + Holder' triple identity model, which is essentially a proactive solution to the 'principal-agent problem'.

- In traditional projects, the goals of founders or management often misalign with those of investors and users, leading to short-term behavior, internal conflicts, and even trust crises. A typical example is profiting from TGE dumps or trading ticker shells after listing, neglecting product development and community building.

- When core members of a project simultaneously take on the triple roles of value creator (Founder), product builder (Builder), and token holder (Holder), it effectively binds the incentive mechanism tightly to long-term value, thus avoiding the imbalance of motivation presented by 'short-term arbitrage'.

- This behavior of strengthening responsibility, extending time preference, and reducing discount rates will make the strategic rhythm of the entire ecosystem more suitable for long-term participants.

➣ Product: Bilateral Market Model

- Things must have aspiration before they can succeed; aspirations must be strengthened before one can avoid fatigue.
- Wu Yubi (Memorial of Li Zhi Studio)

- Particle's revenue model can be broken down into two levels: first, the revenue generated from official application products, such as the spot trading platform UniversalX, the interest-earning platform UniversalE (not yet launched), and the contract trading platform UniversalP (not yet launched); second, capturing the on-chain trading behavior of dApps within the entire ecosystem through Particle Chain and extracting commissions.

- From an economic perspective, Particle is essentially constructing a typical Two-sided Market: one side involves liquidity behavior from users, which is completed through official applications that build a complete chain + real business model to achieve Product-Market Fit (PMF); the other side involves the onboarding and expansion from developers/protocols, with the platform itself positioned between the two sides, completing PMF through 'matching behavior + protocol share'. The resonance between the two sides is the opening of the entire ecological network and flywheel.

- The first revenue model is profit-oriented like a platform product, similar to the App Store model. Particle achieves front-end user transactions, wealth management, borrowing, and other financial activities through deploying chain-abstract applications like UniversalX, and then charges service fees based on the product's usage. The core of this model lies in: the breadth of product design (covering various scenarios like Spot, Perp, wealth management, etc.) + the uniformity of user experience (Universal Account), determining whether it can scale effectively.

- The second revenue model has a more structural moat, essentially serving as chain-level liquidity infrastructure. It can also be understood as a 'real-time settlement system across the entire chain.' Any cross-chain behavior occurring on dApps that connect to Universal Account will be settled by Particle as the underlying relay chain, extracting a take rate. To quote @yuexiaoyu111, this will be the Web3 version of SWIFT. The advantage of this model is that it is not a one-time income but rather a long-term, continuous commission sharing from transactions.

- Similar to the role of Visa Network in traditional finance, Particle does not act as a counterparty for specific transactions but can take a portion from each transaction, gaining scalable revenue leverage as network activity increases.

- More importantly, since the Universal Account achieves the unification of cross-chain funds and accounts, users do not need to repeatedly log in, authorize, or cross bridges, greatly reducing friction costs. This may become a core element for the platform's success in stimulating network effects.

- Such expectations are grand and incredible; at least at present, there is almost no similar operational model, so it inevitably sounds a bit like a grand vision. However, great projects often require great beginnings. How they develop later, we will witness together.

➣ Positive Externality Revenue and Network Effects

- The lower rulers exhaust their abilities, the middle rulers exert human strength, and the upper rulers utilize human wisdom.
- Han Feizi (Han Feizi · Eight Classics)

- @0xpengyu mentioned, 'What we think more is how Particle's business can ultimately win, and win in the long term. Because this is the only choice that maximizes the interests of this composite identity of Builder + Founder + Holder.' This actually points to a core issue: how to construct a revenue model with 'positive externalities'.

- Positive externalities mean that platform behavior is not only beneficial to itself but can also create additional value for other participants in the ecosystem and recover revenue from it. Particle's revenue model is built on this logic: you run your dApp, I provide accounts and liquidity infrastructure; if you grow, I automatically share profits without needing to compete for users or fight over the market.

- Taking the Perp dApp as an example, a contract protocol originally deployed only on the #BNB chain can allow users on the #Sol chain or other chains to place orders directly without crossing bridges or switching accounts by connecting to Particle Chain. And all this happens without Particle needing to do marketing, maintain front-end products, or even bear asset risks, yet it can obtain take rates from this transaction. This is a typical example of 'network collaborative profit' relying on ecological growth rather than single-point breakthroughs.

- Summarizing this process in one sentence: 'We are essentially unifying the entire Web3, and doing so by breaking down all walled gardens.' In translation, the second curve of platform network effects does not expand by extending the product line but by activating more applications through 'unified interfaces + low-intrusion access', allowing them to form dependency on Particle while paying as they use.

- Rather than saying Particle Chain is creating chains, it is more accurate to say it is establishing a 'bridge logic between chains.' Once this bridge logic is widely adopted by developers, Particle naturally gains the 'water extraction rights' of the ecosystem.

- This is also why the team proposed that in the future, income will not only rely on official applications like UniversalX and UniversalE but will gradually turn every on-chain interaction into a source of income for Particle through Infra + SDK. In this model, any explosion of transactions on non-Sol chains, any rise in the popularity of meme coins, and any growth of dApps become passive growth for Particle.

- This is what is known as 'structural growth dividends,' a non-linear expansion growth method based on network externalities. It is not a short-term curve achieved through aggressive expansion but a long-term flywheel created through continuous coverage and deep binding.

Ultimately, saying more is not as important as taking actual action. I hope the team always remembers their original intention, persevering as promised, being worthy of the community and every holder. Maintaining focus amidst the noise and navigating through cycles is the true starting point of long-termism.

$PARTI