The valuation of the Alpha project needs to be evaluated on whether it is expensive or not; for @PlasmaFDN, I am only concerned about whether they are on the bus.
We can understand this from several comparative perspectives.
If a new stablecoin project emerges in the market with a valuation that is too low, it cannot support team operations and ecosystem development, and participants will repeatedly ask: Where do its profits come from? Can it survive?
What if the valuation is too high? Want to burn money? Then it has to compete with PYUSD to see who can burn their way out of the circle better.
From another perspective, if a new public chain project appears with a valuation that is too low, it is likely just a RAAS cloud public chain, and it might stop services one day, leading to the chain's demise;
If the valuation is too high, it could easily become like Babylon or Berachain, with the project side crying and apologizing while having already pocketed the money, leaving nothing behind.
For those who enjoy in-depth analysis, you can check out Delphi's long research report; many core contents can be understood by substituting the context of the project's public information to grasp Plasma's strategic intent.
In summary: Plasma wants to carve out a piece of the stablecoin market, squeezing USDC's market share, pressuring TRON's USDT dominance, reclaiming the USDT role that has settled in ETH, and becoming an upgraded version of the OMNI chain: previously expensive and slow, now free and fast.
The reality is polarized: on one side is the hot listing of CCIP multi-chain infrastructure and CRCL built around USDC, while on the other side is the non-U.S. market served by USDT and Plasma, which cannot go public but can run real scenarios.
Recent cases are worth looking at:
FDUSD transitioned from BUSD to 4B and then fell to 1.3B, with Bn probably subsidizing a lot in between;
USDE currently stands at 5.8B, occupying the fee rate market, facing many difficulties;
USD1 has reached 2.18B, of which 2B is scenario support exchanged for MGX's investment in Bn shares. Frankly, this looks more like a product born out of compromise; to really assess the strength of scenario support, we have to wait for the day USD1’s LPL opens up.
It is important to know that transitioning from one stablecoin to another long-term is difficult; however, cross-chain migration is relatively simple, with much lower thresholds.
Is a valuation of 500M expensive? Is CRCL at 31 dollars expensive? Are you seeing Plasma's advertisement or the consolidation of resources in the competitive landscape?
500M is the valuation cap during the pre-storage phase; when it opens up later, 2B might just be the beginning, and growth will only truly start after the mainnet goes live. However, the ultimate state of all this largely depends on resource allocation and execution capability. How to manage the gray migration?
One year later, the share of the USDT network that Plasma can occupy will determine its long-term value. As for how to achieve this goal, that is up to the team. What we need to consider is whether we want to be on this bus.
Note: This content is merely an expression of personal opinion and does not constitute any investment advice. The projects mentioned may have uncertainties, and their valuations, development paths, resource acquisition capabilities, and market shares may be influenced by various factors, including but not limited to policy regulation, team execution, liquidity support, and industry competition. The market changes rapidly; please assess risks and make prudent decisions when participating in any project.
