Next Step for Virtuals: The 69 Plan

The "69 Plan" is a brand new token launch model designed to balance founder commitment with community trust through a 69-day experimental window.

69-Day Experimental Window:

After launching the token on the Genesis platform, the project team enters a 69-day testing period to collect market feedback (trading volume, community engagement, etc.) and validate product-market fit.

Dual-Track Result Design:

Continue Operation: If the team chooses to continue operations, they will receive pre-allocated team tokens and accumulated trading fees.

Terminate Project: If expectations are not met and the project is terminated, LP will automatically liquidate, and funds will be proportionally returned to token holders, with trading fees distributed according to holding ratios.

Abuse Prevention Mechanism:

Founders must publicly disclose their identity via Loom video and articulate the project vision.

This seems like a very interesting approach, suitable for those very early-stage projects, allowing founders and teams to test real market feedback with a relatively low exit cost in the early stages, while the community also hopes to gain substantial returns by supporting the project early on.

Another thing, I participated in the $AIN new token offering this morning, and there is currently a 10x unrealized profit. The homogenization issue of the Virtuals genesis launch projects is serious, and here are some features/directions I suggest adding:

1/ Integration with quality centralized exchanges. Currently, the ceiling FDV for projects launched by Virtuals is around $20 million. There are many reasons for this; first, Virtuals is tailored for small to medium AI projects, focusing on being small yet refined; second, the Virtuals system covers various aspects such as token launch, liquidity management, and marketing, but the final link, which is CEX, is still lacking. Currently, a massive number of users and funds remain in CEX, and only by bridging this link can valuations rise.

2/ The incentive part is currently well done by Virtuals, but there is a lack of information disclosure and punishment mechanisms. For example, I have seen some past projects with blemishes that have already issued tokens, suddenly rebranding with an AI narrative and launching another token. This is meaningless. At the very least, the comment feature should be enabled, allowing the community to review ongoing projects rather than searching for content on social media. Alternatively, a blemish disclosure database could be introduced, integrating on-chain data with intelligence from the X platform to establish a project team historical record query tool, reducing information asymmetry.

Feeling a bit tired, I’ll write as I go. Continuing to delve into @virtuals_io!

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。