Looking back at this new round of trading and launch platforms, I increasingly feel that: The core factor that determines whether a platform can rise or not is often only one: Do you have the ability to bring the 'conspiracy group' over and continue to cause trouble on top. The product can be iterated. The mechanism can be replicated. The interface is not user-friendly and can be gradually improved. Even the founder standing at the forefront doesn't necessarily have to be a big shot. These are not the most difficult. The real difficulty is: Can you find the resources. Can assets be continuously launched. Can the dealer make money here. Can we constantly create new topics and keep funds, attention, and trading teams on the platform. The most valuable feature of a launch platform is never the 'create token' button. But rather the ability to organize people, money, content, liquidity, and exit channels into the same table. Why do many platforms with seemingly good mechanisms still go unplayed in the end? Because the mechanism can only attract researchers. The money making effect is the only way to attract the village. The banker will not be relieved to transfer funds and resources just because your document is 80 pages long. What they truly care about is: Is there any liquidity here? Has anyone taken over the order? Do you have the ability to spread? Have you exited the channel? Did the person who came ahead make money? So the most effective way for a new platform to cold start, besides offline resources, is only one: First, create a high market value project. It can be a project with a product or a Meme. As long as it really runs out, it can prove three things at the same time: The platform has liquidity. Platforms can generate attention. The banker has the opportunity to make money here and exit safely. This high market value project is not the result of ecological maturity. On the contrary, it is usually the starting point for the true activation of ecology. With the first profitable model, other teams will come over. Only when someone comes to issue coins will users come to trade. An increase in users and liquidity will attract stronger teams. Finally, a flywheel is formed: Platform pulls resources → Strong team generates assets → Project gains market value → Banker earns money → More resources and teams enter the market. According to this logic, the new launch platforms that have been preliminarily validated include: Pons and LONG on Robinhood Chain. STONK on Solana. They may not have already won the final war. But at least they have proven one thing to the market with high attention projects: This platform does not only have coin issuance function. There are really people causing trouble here, and there are also people making money. So when judging a new launch platform in the future, don't just look at whether the mechanism is new or not, whether the page is beautiful or not, and whether the founder has many fans. Let's first look at four things: Who is posting assets on it. Who is supporting the plate behind. Who is responsible for creating communication. Have there been any high-value targets that can be remembered by the market. The product determines whether the platform can be used. The money making effect determines whether everyone is willing to come or not. A platform that allows people to issue coins can only be considered a tool. Only when a group of people can continue to come and make money repeatedly, can they have the opportunity to become an ecosystem. Continuing to recommend everyone to register for FOMO, you can use my link to waive some transaction fees: https://fomo.family/r/duanwangye66