整理 & 编译：深潮TechFlow

播出日期：2025 年 5 月 24 日

播客源：Web3 101

【Host】

Liu Feng, Partner at BODL Ventures, former Editor-in-Chief of ChainNews

Xiong Haojun Jack, Deputy Editor-in-Chief of Rhythm BlockBeats, Host of "Web3 Anonymous Talk"

【Guest】

Pima, Co-founder of Continue Capital

Legendary investor in the cryptocurrency world, Pima visits Web3 101 to discuss why he believes memes are immortal and the investment logic behind meme launch platforms, as well as how the investment themes in the cryptocurrency world have changed after the complete transformation of the era we are in.

Cosmos Meme Reflection: The Siphoning Effect of Liquidity and the Matthew Effect

Liu Feng: As an OG, you once had remarkable achievements in the public chain and DeFi fields, but in today's Crypto investment world, OG feels like a derogatory term. The most impressive story now is how P junior has become P marshal. What do you think of this trend?

Pima:

I consider myself a relatively seasoned participant in Memecoins. On one hand, I have done a lot of work in this cycle on Solana, participating in all of Solana's Memecoins, including the earliest BONK, WIF, BOME, POP CAT, and later GOAT, as well as many projects that were eliminated through competition. At that time, we took it for granted that Solana's meme revival would lead to a certain revival in other public chains, so after laying out BONK on Solana, I went to ecosystems like Cosmos and Avalanche to look for similar Memecoins to invest in, which seemed like a very logical approach to me at the time.

However, I overlooked the siphoning effect of liquidity and the Matthew effect. Once you participate in the first wave, it has already ended. You think there will be a second or third wave, but in fact, it has completed its historical mission during the initial rebound phase, and the remaining mainstream capital attention will return to some on-chain ecosystems primarily based on Solana.

I have previously shared that Memecoins account for about 1% to 3% of the public chain market value, and in extreme cases, it may reach 5%. At that time, I made many observations and statistics and concluded that the top Memecoins accounted for 1% to 5% of the public chain market value during a certain period. There are a few outlier cases in this range, such as DOGE and SHIB, but I excluded them.

As the cryptocurrency market developed, you would find that Solana was completely incompatible with this system. It had a large number of Memecoins emerging one after another, presenting a completely different atmosphere from other ecosystems.

This is entirely determined by Solana's retail investors. Solana is a market centered around retail investors, which leads to the emergence of many tracks and fields that easily bring emotional, volatile, and highly market-oriented experiences to retail investors. On one hand, I wanted to observe the entire Solana ecosystem, and on the other hand, I was also willing to actively participate in Memecoins, which have liquidity, participation, a broad user base, and are relatively non-mainstream.

In this behavioral finance feast of Memecoins, how can one make money?

Liu Feng: If someone wants to invest in Memecoins, how can they make money? This is a particularly blunt question.

Pima:

I have about 90% of my Memecoins on Solana, or even more, and I don't pay attention to any other coins on other chains. This market has evolved a most optimal solution for you; you are just looking for a second alternative on this optimal solution.

The core reason for seeking a second alternative is that you did not achieve a result on the optimal solution, or you did not participate, and you are just looking for that kind of catch-up, which can easily trap people into investment pitfalls. You will find that once you get in, it either doesn't rise, or it tortures you between rising and falling. Another core issue is that it's hard to cash out; you will find that when Solana's top meme pulls back 30%, your 200% profit is gone, and the pullback happens very quickly. Therefore, I generally do not pursue final cashing out in any investment system. I personally believe that trying to avoid the first cut from bull to bear in the entire market is very difficult. Crypto operates 24/7, and you cannot monitor all market fluctuations in real-time, which means that unrealized gains are easy to achieve but hard to cash out.

The role of the leader is that it gives you a second opportunity to reach a high point, allowing you to attempt to realize profits, so it's basically enough to focus on the leaders.

Secondly, I believe that when people invest in Memecoins, they often focus on a quick and short approach. However, from my personal experience of achieving significant results, a quick and short approach may not be suitable for medium to large investors unless your size is particularly small.

Participants in quick and short strategies are often attracted by short-term attention and do not consider the core operational logic of Memecoins. If you break down Memecoins into horizontal and vertical axes, with the x-axis representing time and the y-axis representing market value, you will find that the market value of the vast majority of Memecoins is proportional to time. Time is a very important concept; aside from a few exceptional cases like BOME and TRUMP, all existing Memecoins with a market value of over $1 billion have been operating for more than six months. Without the time factor, many assumptions do not hold.

I think Memecoins are often a feast of behavioral finance.

One of the founders of behavioral finance, Richard Thaler, who is also a Nobel Prize winner, divided the original investment system into two types: one is a savings account, and the other is an entertainment account. The entire Memecoin phenomenon has a strong entertainment account attribute and function. Daniel Kahneman also wrote a very famous thought, dividing people into two systems: System 1, which requires thinking, emphasizes logic and rationality, and consumes a lot of energy; and System 2, which is simple, direct, and quick, requiring little energy. Reflecting on the Crypto field, Memecoins perfectly align with System 2, being quick and effective, highly volatile, and satisfying our emotional and financial operations related to FOMO.

A couple of weeks ago, I came across a paper stating that a person's investment decision-making process might not exceed six minutes; now in Memecoins, it can even be six seconds. This is very similar to many of our investment decisions. I actually have many investment decisions that are very impulsive. Of course, my impulsiveness is because I have already thought through and arranged my foundational Beta or savings account, allowing me to have a lot of time and energy to explore more possibilities in the Alpha market. A very important challenge that behavioral finance poses to traditional finance is that everyone is irrational; what you consider rational is merely living in your own information bubble. People live in a huge noise environment, and most people lack the ability to discern noise.

In summary, I believe Memecoins represent a significant advancement in behavioral finance. If we later develop a theoretical system related to behavioral finance, we can completely use some data from Memecoins as research samples.

The Three Soul-Searching Questions: Are you willing to buy? If you buy, are you willing to go all in? Can you hold on when it drops?

Liu Feng: From the past few cycles, we learned your tightly-knit investment logic, but today we may only look at volatility and whether the social consensus of memes can quickly attract liquidity. Do you think this situation can continue?

Pima:

In fact, many investments are difficult because the times are changing, the structure of investors, the age range of investments, and the income levels of investors are all changing.

First, I will state my conclusion: Memecoins will definitely continue to develop, and this is not limited to Crypto. In my view, the Crypto field is not a separate market; it is completely related to and synchronized with world development. Those who have missed the era's dividends, many unemployed people, those eliminated by globalization, and those who are stuck in a rigid class without direction and investment opportunities, they use a rebellious psychology to refuse to cast a large number of votes for those elite personas. Whether it is the tariffs in the United States, the rise of new nationalism in Europe, or the rise of right-wing conservatism in Australia, there is a global wave of new nationalism. This trend in real life condenses into slogans like "All in" and "One shot," and this trend is not limited to the Crypto field but is global.

I believe the rise of nationalism has injected significant power into the Memecoin market and other niche markets and speculative markets. This power will, with the development of AI and peer-to-peer internet information technology, cause a significant impact on traditional financial markets.

You pay attention to P junior because he brings a lot of chips and results, which is the most impactful, shareable, and eye-catching. I personally avoid sharing practical charts, but many other Twitter users use it to gain huge exposure. On the other hand, we now emphasize information equality. Human attention is very limited; when your attention is heavily focused on P junior, you will definitely not conduct in-depth research on the theoretical system. The core comes back to the old three questions: Are you willing to buy? If you buy, are you willing to go all in? Can you hold on when it drops?

Many times, you only obtain results but do not gain the decision-making thought process behind the results. So even if you know the results, you still won't buy, won't dare to buy, won't buy heavily, and won't hold on.

With the arrival of a lonely society, selling demand is more attractive than selling products for niche tracks. What is demand in the Crypto field? It is a sense of psychological identity; users holding Memecoins form a small group and community, creating a strong psychological identification, and this extremely identified community only reinforces itself. Unfortunately, Pump has already launched over a million Memecoins, but only a few have survived. This state of excessive participation without results creates a very contradictory situation: seeing others achieve great results can greatly stimulate oneself, leading to more diligence, further mistakes in wrong choices, and then affecting one's mindset, making it difficult to focus on analysis and summary, resulting in even poorer outcomes, creating a vicious cycle.

Memecoins are a very interesting social phenomenon, but the number of observers is decreasing.

Focusing More on Meme Infrastructure: Which LaunchPads Are Worth Researching?

Jack:

Many Memes might not bring particularly significant results even if they increase by 100 times. So what is your purpose in frequently participating in small and medium-sized Memes?

Pima:

This is a measure of market participation; I need to engage in the most liquid market with the most retail investors. When I discuss Memecoins, it’s not about what results Memecoins can bring me. For our investments, I might be more focused on the Memecoin infrastructure, such as DEXs and LaunchPads. These are two completely different systems; you can think of it as Beta in one hand and Alpha in the other. For me, only after my Beta work is very solid do I allocate some time and energy to invest in the Memecoin market to feel the market trends.

The best aspect of the Crypto field is that you can use subtle observations to sense the flow of global capital markets. All Memecoins may go to zero, but for us, there is not much significant loss. However, the trends in Memecoins are reflected and correlated with other investment markets, but most people do not feel this. We need to consider the allocation of global capital; these targets only serve my core Beta choices, so participation in Memecoins is merely to validate some logic, allowing us to make more reasonable assessments of some core targets in Beta.

Liu Feng: I actually understand your logic. Previously, you shared your Meme investment logic. Why do you only want to achieve real gains from large-cap Memes? This is related to your scale and is completely different from the logic many people have of changing their fate through investing in Memes. Retail investors may only want to talk about Alpha, but for you, Beta is more important.

This era is actually the era of Memecoins; Memes have become the voice of the times. We should not deny it but accept it.

In this case, we can look at Beta and see if we can introduce some operational launch platforms that have undergone several generations of evolution and that you find worth researching.

Pima:

The most eye-catching is still Pump.fun (hereinafter referred to as Pump). They actually have not innovated much, but the core business model in Crypto is transaction fees. The more market share you can capture from this business model, the more cash flow you have, and thus the higher your valuation. Pump meets the need for asset issuance, and this product integrates the huge demand for Memecoins, leading to a perfect match with an endless supply and an infinite pursuit of extremely high multiples by retail investors. Therefore, you will see asset issuance platforms springing up like mushrooms after rain.

Retail consumers in the Crypto field are a highly financialized group with a strong risk awareness and a high impulse for speculation. You need to design products targeting this impulse. Where do retail investors spend money? Only on transaction fees; they would rather pay you higher fees in hopes of hitting a Memecoin. They are not fools; why do they pay such high MEV priority fees? Because they believe the returns can cover the costs.

We position Crypto retail investors as a group of extremely financialized individuals. All our products must revolve around their needs, which is one of the important factors for Pump.fun's success. The later development of AI Virtuals is also a LaunchPad. Both satisfy the strong demand for asset issuance, so we observe that this launch platform is a very good investment target. Memecoins can die by the thousands, yet new Memecoins will continue to emerge, but a good launch platform can solidify your funds, allow for profits, and truly enable you to win passively while capturing the maximum value in the entire Memecoin operational trend or wave.

Launch Platforms and Public Chains: Attracting Developers is Key

Jack: For example, now that Virtuals has come to Solana, do you think it’s too late? Is there only one opportunity?

Pima:

For all launch platforms, you need to understand their supply and demand. Who acts as the supplier for the launch platform? This is a very important factor. The suppliers for Pump are many anonymous entities, while Virtuals has some selection but is also anonymous. Therefore, when evaluating any launch platform, you should closely monitor revenue.

My evaluation system for launch platforms is exactly the same as for DEXs. In another sense, launch platforms are somewhat similar to public chains; it’s just that people have not elevated the two to the same level.

As a launch platform, the core capability lies in how to attract developers, which is exactly the same logic as public chains. Why would developers choose A over B? This is a very worthy question to think deeply about, as it is the most important issue determining the future direction of launch platforms and public chains.

Since the service experience is occupied by a large number of retail investors, we usually consider launch platforms, including public chains, to be a B2C market. However, in my view, they are actually a B2B market. Without good assets and good developers entering, your public chain or launch platform will never succeed.

The most important thing for public chains and launch platforms is future cash flow income, which relies on continuous trading volume, and trading volume depends on a rich variety of offerings. Therefore, how to attract excellent developers to your launch platform is the core. It is actually very easy to conquer retail investors; as long as there are good assets, retail investors will come.

Of course, whether it’s a public chain or a launch platform, it often tests some marketing methods and strategies, but without the injection of quality assets, it is difficult for a launch platform or public chain to sustain itself.

The Unique Market Positioning of Believe

Pima:

I think Believe's market entry strategy is correct. APP developers have a huge demand for financing, but they almost never receive funding. The supply side of Believe consists of independent developers who develop a large number of apps each year, hoping to achieve positive cash flow from their apps but lacking suitable channels for monetization. If the market is niche, it cannot reach a valuation of billions or hundreds of billions.

Believe focuses on this group of independent developers, or those who want to try new fields and directions. Crypto retail investors have a very high risk awareness and tolerance, and the most crucial point is that their market value is very low, which has long enabled the possibility of achieving hundredfold or thousandfold returns. Believe directly borrows some experiences from other launch platforms, sharing costs with these developers, which is excellent, achieving positive cash flow for independent developers in the cold start phase.

In traditional fields, developing an app requires many people for development, marketing, and a lot of work, but in Crypto, it’s just about creating a product. Whether this product can succeed is not important, but once it launches successfully, it can generate hundreds of thousands of dollars in cash flow within a week, which is a considerable income for independent developers. Once they have this positive cash flow, they can continue to refine their products, expand their markets, and serve their users.

This also explains why this model is called the internet capital market; it meets the strong demand for financing from a large number of small developers and micro-enterprises, releasing the supply side. Moreover, with the arrival of AI, independent developers can achieve very good annual revenues on their own, and their promotional operations can completely leverage TikTok and Twitter for viral dissemination.

But do I have confidence that Believe will produce very large and successful enterprises? I actually do not have confidence in that; I take an observational attitude towards it. However, I firmly believe that Believe has very well addressed a niche market that serves a small scope, specific groups, and very targeted customers. They earn money from this segment, meaning they do not need to grow large, but they have their market.

Additionally, what impressed me about Believe is their careful planning and packaging. Their page design is quite meticulous, and they also focus on launching certain projects and activities. They attempt to tell a story, and besides the Crypto field, they can also connect with other market niche groups. These traditional internet developers are not familiar with crypto, and this process will definitely resemble the first wave of the AI market. Personally, I think thousands of such projects will die; this is a process of familiarity and adaptation, and we will observe it gradually.

Liu Feng: You are very supportive of Believe's logic and its own positioning; it resembles a practical application launch platform. Now all launch assets are meme-based, and Believe may produce a batch of usable applications.

Pima:

Let’s hope so, haha.

Update: Before this podcast episode was released, the Believe team announced that they would suspend the automatic token issuance function of Launchcoin, which will now be manually reviewed and tagged as verified. We again asked Pima to comment on this change. Pima's view is: "Review systems are generally quite foolish; permissionless is the way to go." Clearly, he does not like this change.

Liu Feng: We have also pulled out some of the applications emerging on Believe or some assets that are being launched. I should have a list of about fifty or sixty. I am also thinking that if this is just a meme-based thing, it has already become too abstract, but if there are really usable applications, it might be something different. Including platforms like Dingaling that are promoting their launch platform, its advantage lies in its unique token design, but with only token design, I think it’s very difficult to establish a position in the market because Virtuals' token design is already quite extreme.

Pima:

The key point is to have people; how to entice developers to your launch platform is a very critical issue.

Trading Volume: The Only Evaluation Standard for Launch Platforms

Pima:

The only standard for evaluating LaunchPads is trading volume, as trading volume represents core revenue. If you don't understand this underlying logic, you wouldn't invest when Pump comes out.

Now you see the results; Pump has already earned $700 million. So what is a reasonable valuation for Pump? Under normal logic, a valuation of $14 billion at a 20x PE is reasonable. If we consider the high volatility and the fact that Memecoins are not durable, a valuation of $7 billion at a 10x PE is also acceptable, or even $3.5 billion at a 5x PE. The core of this question is:

What exactly are you investing in? It is an investment in the discounted future cash flows.

So when you consider a LaunchPad, it’s not about whether this platform is currently worth $100 million, $200 million, or $1 billion, but whether the platform's revenue can continue to expand in the future. This is actually completely applicable to stock market investment logic.

Crypto AI: Result-Oriented Investment Returns

Liu Feng: Here, I must ask you to disclose that you have invested in Believe, right?

Pima: Yes.

Liu Feng: This disclosure is quite important; listeners might think that since Pima has invested in this project, he holds it in high regard. Therefore, if viewed as an investment, I believe everyone should do their own research and take responsibility for themselves.

Besides Memes, are you also looking at AI Agents?

Pima:

Currently, the entire AI track is basically result-oriented, focusing on investment returns.

In the Crypto AI field, we feel that all these infrastructure investments seem to be repeating the borrowing of some AI technologies from the internet field, so we think it doesn't have a particularly deep moat and lacks unique characteristics. Therefore, we generally focus on results, meaning you can help me with trading or increasing my revenue. The combination of AI and social media may have more profit explosion points.

Liu Feng: It sounds like you are not very confident in Crypto AI or Crypto's AI agents?

Pima:

On one hand, I believe that many of their core technologies basically come from traditional internet fields. On the other hand, they need to find their own business model. Pump, as a representative of the application side's rise, is very important. We tend to look more at some ecosystems on the application side.

For the application ecosystem, I first need to know where the paying user base is. Besides asset issuance and trading, many application projects ultimately fail to materialize because they cannot achieve positive cash flow. For example, in gaming, can you tell me of a game that has achieved stable annual revenues of $300 million or $500 million? No.

Liu Feng: In the real world of gaming, this is certainly possible, but in Crypto, it clearly relies on selling tokens to achieve such revenue.

Pima:

Yes, because of the uniqueness of Crypto users, players might think, "You want me to pay? Am I hearing this right?" No one is willing to spend money, but the main business logic of games is to spend money.

Therefore, in the application field, revenue is still the main focus. Where does the revenue come from? What is the quality of the revenue generated? What is the sustainability of the revenue generated? These are all points we pay close attention to, focusing on results.

Liu Feng: So it can be said that your current investment logic is very clear: don't tell me about trends and grand visions; what I want is for you to truly deliver results, to be self-sustaining, and to have real users.

Pima:

Exactly, because the times are evolving, innovation is changing, the macro interest rate environment is changing, and the logic of globalization is also changing. I believe many things cannot remain unchanged.

Optimistic About the Future Development of Crypto

Liu Feng: The crypto circle you describe seems to be quite different from the one we are familiar with.

Pima:

Actually, I am very optimistic about the future development of the crypto circle.

Many logics revolve around trading. If we can better meet the trading experience of global users, whether it’s a launch platform, DEX, traditional exchanges, or trading software, these products have market demand and users willing to pay for them.

U.S. legislation is gradually becoming legal and compliant, and a large amount of money will flow onto the chain. Stablecoins are currently only $200 billion; in the next two to three years, or three to five years, stablecoins may continue to grow to $1 trillion. At this scale, it will present a 24-hour trading and operation environment. The trading track can extend into a particularly large market space, so I am very much looking forward to on-chain DeFi or on-chain internet financial products.

Additionally, the core business model in the entire Crypto field is transaction fees. After achieving the recovery of transaction fees, companies can expand their user base positively. Combined with the religious nature of the Crypto community, it is very likely to achieve market growth and space in some niche areas that we cannot access.

This is actually a very good operational logic I see: you do not need to maintain cash flow by selling tokens; you just need to encourage more trading. If you can achieve an average daily trading volume of $100 million, you might earn $1 million, and you can completely expand your coverage to achieve higher returns.

Of course, there are some issues, such as once it reaches arbitrage, or if the product does not obtain positive information flow beyond trading, it may collapse. But that is not important; what matters is that we see a very good way to kickstart growth, which is to use transaction fees to support the initial growth of enterprises. This also aligns very well with the characteristics of Crypto investment.

Liu Feng: You are still so spirited; thank you for this boost of faith.

Pima:

I just see a possibility.

The Core of Public Chains Lies in Gas Fees and MEV Fees

Jack: I actually have another confusion. Earlier, you mentioned that with the development of stablecoins, more funds may flow onto the chain. However, is it possible that all these funds flowing onto the chain remain in stablecoin status, with transactions also priced and anchored in stablecoins? They may not use the native assets of the chain, such as ETH or Solana, and the profit-generating platforms may only stay at the application level of Pump. The underlying chain seems to remain in a token-selling model, selling tokens to nodes, which then sell them to the market. It appears that the underlying token no longer has the ability to generate cash flow through transaction fees. As a result, even though there may indeed be a lot of money in this industry, it seems to provide little help to the underlying tokens.

Pima:

The core of public chains lies in gas fees and the gradually developing MEV.

Gas fees are the costs you need to pay for every action you take. You can think of it as a cost expenditure for bandwidth storage or computing resources on a public chain over a period of time. This is a place where you have to pay, and having to pay means this is a very good business model and investment system logic.

A large amount of stablecoins flowing onto the chain will create liquidity demand and trading demand, regardless of which chain they connect to. Asset tokenization is a significant trend. Because it has very high transparency and flexibility, along with 24/7 uninterrupted features. You need to understand more deeply what on-chain Nasdaq is: it is the issuance and trading of assets, which is your source.

When so much capital comes in, you can look at the revenue of Tron; their revenue is very stable, maintaining around $10 billion because of the demand for stablecoin gas fees.

Jack: I understand this point, but the current observable trend, for example, from Ethereum, shows that in the last cycle, due to gas fees and various on-chain innovations, whether it’s NFTs or DeFi, it significantly boosted its value capture. However, during the process of many applications going on-chain, its gas fees have also become an obstacle to its own expansion, leading to a process of reducing gas fees. As gas fees continue to decrease, it is found that despite the increase in on-chain adoption, gas revenue is decreasing, and ultimately it cannot rely on this to maintain its own value. Similar phenomena seem to be observable on Solana.

Pima:

You are absolutely right. All blockchain systems are a type of software, and software will continue to iterate. If you think from a long-term, ultimate perspective, the marginal cost of gas fees for all public chains approaches zero. So how do they profit?

You can look at the priority fees on Solana; the basic fees on Solana account for about one-third, while most of the rest are tips and priority fees. Why raise tips and priority fees? This is actually the most competitive aspect. In the future, public chain revenue will depend on tips and MEV. Solana has also differentiated its ecosystem through this; basic fees are just for ordinary transfers, meaning that transfers incur one type of fee, while other transactions incur another type of fee.

You will find that when you optimize the system around trading, you can capture a large amount of profit at the trading end. The profits from MEV and REV are substantial, and in future developments, they will certainly far exceed gas fees. Why do users pay for acceleration? Because they want to seize a block; the trading market operates on a first-come, first-served basis. This is also the reason for the pursuit of millisecond block speeds in on-chain Nasdaq. Currently, Solana is at 400 milliseconds, which is far from enough. I think it may need to reach around 20 milliseconds to compete with traditional internet speeds.

In this competition for REV or MEV, customers are willing to pay, which is the core competitiveness. Why are customers willing to pay? Because they see profit potential. Whoever occupies the majority of MEV will make customers more willing to pay, which determines the future core cash flow discounting method for enterprises.

Currently, 80% of Solana's daily revenue comes from tips, priority fees, and MEV fees, which is very telling. We need to seek more sustainable, efficient, and high-quality revenue.

The moat for a chain's development is its developers. Public chains are a B2B market; the C-side does not determine their success or failure. How public chains attract developers is up to their own abilities. For me, the important indicators for assessing the growth potential and future plasticity of a public chain are its trading volume, REV, and developers.

We are currently trying not to invest in any public chain projects; the overall situation is already set, and what remains uncertain is your position. Additionally, there is the network effect; for example, why not challenge CATL in the new energy sector? Because building an ecosystem is a very difficult task.

Liu Feng: Can we say that in your view, the landscape of the public chain world is already fixed, and we shouldn't expect any new public chains to rise and succeed?

Pima:

In the past decade, China's internet has given birth to a tech giant like ByteDance, which is worth hundreds of billions. If venture capital or the secondary market did not invest in ByteDance over the past decade, there’s basically no point in continuing, because 55% of the profits have been taken by ByteDance. The 80/20 rule exists in every field, and our expectations for many things stem from our loyalty to past logic.

Crypto still has hope, just like Hyperliquid is rising. I believe Hyperliquid and Solana have the same goal: to become a decentralized Nasdaq, and Monad seems to fit this as well.

The core issue is that we have learned to count. We have a large number of ETFs coming, and we are facing more mature investors. In the future, with a unified account, trading friction will decrease. Today you can buy Nvidia, Alibaba, or Tencent, and tomorrow you can buy a Bitcoin ETF in the same account. Who you buy determines who is expensive and who is cheap.

The core question is, why give Solana and Ethereum a 100x or 200x PE? If your revenue performance does not meet expectations after multiple cycles, then the PE must drop. The investment system is becoming more mature, but many people have not thought about this issue. The focus should be on core revenue and fundamental aspects.

There are many people in this world willing to think; it’s just that everyone’s attention is now extremely fragmented and one-sided. Therefore, they express emotions using simple, abstract language, such as "a shuttle," which is also a reflection of social evolution. What is scarce in this world is independent thinking and the ability to discern noise.

Layer 2 Has Greatly Weakened Ethereum's Economic Value

Liu Feng: My last question was originally going to be about whether you would choose Ethereum or Solana, but clearly, that question is no longer necessary.

So, can you tell me how Ethereum made you abandon it? Why? Are Ethereum's developers not capable?

Pima:

I believe the core shift for Ethereum occurred in 2018 and 2019. When you asked me about a bearish area, I said Layer 2 would greatly weaken Ethereum's economic value.

I have actually studied these so-called professional terms like currency settlement layer and execution layer, but I’m not interested in them because these things are best quantified. How much money has the settlement layer settled? How much can Layer 1 earn in a day? Once Layer 2 splits, okay, all the money is earned by Base and Arbitrum; how much of that is handed over to the central government, Ethereum? Is this revenue-sharing method reasonable? After Layer 2 local lords gain a large amount of economic ownership, will they seek armed independence? Will they seek a more profitable market operation? I think these are questions that Ethereum has not thought through in the past.

I believe everything can be quantified and explained with certain financial metrics. The gross margin of public chains is actually very high. It’s important to clarify who is making this money; if you don’t understand this, you won’t know who will foot the bill. This is a very important issue.

So I personally believe that Ethereum's move to Layer 2 is a relatively wrong approach, as it has not provided good feedback to Ethereum; all the money has been taken by the Layer 2 local lords.

Conclusion

Liu Feng: Finally, I would like to dedicate this episode of the podcast to a very good friend known to both me and Pima. He is a fan of Pima and left us in the second half of last year, which we all regret deeply.

I think if he were here, he would listen to this episode very seriously, so I want to dedicate it to him, and thank Pima for sharing.

免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。