it honestly makes perfect sense that ct has gone from hating on tradfi (2017) to VCs (2021) to crypto founders themselves (2025).

look around. nearly every found is playing opposite sides in a game, telling VCs how they'll make money from users, and telling users how they'll make money from VC funding.

when you tell users you're giving them value, and then tell VCs that they can extract that value from users, nobody is going to trust you.

because to-date, there have largely been two types of founders.

on the one side, there are the ones who genuinely care about users, and then have to figure out a narrative to sell it to VCs.

and on the other, there are the ones who just want to max token value, and then have to figure out a narrative to sell it to users.

the real issue here isn't the founders forced to play this game. the issue is that this became a game in the first place because token value and utility diverged in such opposite directions. the high-priced tokens have typically benefitted from mimetics, being compared to other products in their category, rather than any intrinsic value. it's gotten to the point that if something is useful, it tends to be worth *less* because it can be valued.

but we also have to understand that the game is changing—rapidly.

the actual winning products and tokens from the past year are the ones that can actually generate revenue. users are so used to having that subsidized by VCs that they call it "extraction"; it feels inconceivable to ct that people would pay for something they like because, well, that's never really been the case in crypto.

but it is the case now. and it means there are exciting things that can be built, that can generate revenue, and that can maybe, just maybe, be fun and interesting and valuable enough that users will actually spend money on them.

which is to say that there is a solution here.

and the solution is apps.