solana:Grass7B4RdKfBCjTKgSqnXkqjwiGvQyFbuSCUJr3XXjs After a period of price increase, an official online meeting was held on July 7th, followed by a sharp drop. Here are a few issues: 1. Although the project team’s revenue is quite impressive, with an annual estimate of $100M, their expenses are also significant, with fixed monthly costs potentially reaching $3M, not including personnel expenses. 2. Currently, all contracts, revenue, and assets are under the Grass Foundation, but the foundation’s data is highly non-transparent. 3. What everyone cares about most is how much profit the foundation will allocate for token buybacks. This was not clarified during the meeting. This figure depends on the foundation’s actual data and the proportion they are willing to share. The project turning from losses to profitability is indeed something to celebrate, but as token holders, the primary concern remains the token buyback issue. At the same time, many miners who participated reportedly received what’s being called “insulting” rewards. If the project’s profitability comes at the expense of countless miners contributing significant network resources, then the sustainability of this profitability is questionable. Previously, there were many complaints about the rewards issue. I have a feeling that even if the remaining funds for token buybacks are disclosed, it likely won’t be much, which is why I exited before the meeting. The Venice equity financing incident also caused a huge stir. This is a common problem across the crypto industry: what the hell is the actual value of these tokens? Let’s not even talk about the blatantly malicious project teams for now. Many project teams use tokens to attract a large audience, but in the end, they’re evasive. Whether it’s equity financing or token financing, they ultimately refuse to return tangible profits to their supporters!