One thing that’s kind of interesting about the REV screeching (and really this is not really related to whether you think it’s the right argument, idk exactly what’s going on fwiw) is that there’s an implicit claim now that “you always have the opportunity to stake” so when understanding the value accrual, the default assumption is that the net yield (earnings / REV, etc) is *always* accessible to the entire float (holders) of a token at any given time.

This is probably true in practice but it’s not really how, for example, Ethereum was initially proposed where stakers were “doing work” for the network in the same way that bitcoin hashers are “doing work” for the network and their yield or earnings or whatever is outside the scope, indeed a completely different economy altogether, than that of the network / token valuation.

A gold miner has profits and expenses but holders of gold don’t share in profits from holding gold. Staking systems aren’t really like this, which is fine and it’s true REV is a real metric (not disputing this), but it does *imply* an equity-like structure. I think it’s reasonable to say “ETH or SOL holders always have the opportunity to stake” but you wouldn’t say “BTC holders always have the opportunity to mine BTC” even though it’s not a scientific statement and more just a statement we understand to be true in how these networks are designed.