Spent half the day yesterday researching Venice. The funding news about Venice was supposed to be good, but base:0xacfe6019ed1a7dc6f7b508c02d1b04ec88cc21bf ended up dropping instead of rising. The key controversy lies here: Although this round of funding didn’t increase the market sell pressure for VVV, based on the official explanation and disclosure about the funding, the current Treasure belongs to the Venice company. If that’s the case, then VVV only holds utility value. Utility value isn’t necessarily a bad thing—if Venice can continue to develop steadily, there’s still room for imagination. But in this scenario, base:0xacfe6019ed1a7dc6f7b508c02d1b04ec88cc21bf starts to overlap with DIEM in terms of positioning. Another issue is that, while the team has been repurchasing and burning VVV tokens, the proportion of this is unclear, and the official team retains the right to interpret it. When the majority of ecosystem dividends flow into equity, and the token’s positioning overlaps with DIEM, base:0xacfe6019ed1a7dc6f7b508c02d1b04ec88cc21bf’s role becomes a bit awkward.