CryptoDSK

966 posts

CryptoDSK banner
CryptoDSK

CryptoDSK

@CryptoDsk

Passionate about crypto and blockchain. My opinions are personal and not an investment advice, DYOR as always.

België Katılım Aralık 2017
3.4K Takip Edilen150 Takipçiler
CryptoDSK retweetledi
Crypto Avex
Crypto Avex@CryptoAvex·
Hi Justin, Here is my detailed reply over your post on $TAO is a ponzi thread. I read your every word. Here’s where you are wrong.👇🏼 Claim 1: “$328M emissions vs $15M revenue = ponzi” Bitcoin generated $0 revenue for years. Ethereum’s early revenue didn’t justify its emissions either. Every L1 bootstraps with inflation. That’s not a ponzi, that’s protocol growth stage. The question is: does revenue trajectory justify the model? For $TAO, it does. Claim 2: “Chutes costs 3.5x more than Deepseek” Correct, today. But Deepseek is subsidized by Chinese state capital. Venice AI chose Bittensor ANYWAY. PwC France chose Bittensor ANYWAY. Why would sophisticated institutions pay MORE unless they’re getting something centralized providers can’t offer? Censorship resistance. Privacy. Unstoppable compute. Claim 3: “Subnet owners keep 100% revenue + 18% emissions = scam” This is literally how every startup ecosystem works. AWS builders keep their revenue too. App Store developers keep 70%. The emissions are venture capital in protocol form funding builders to create real products. BIT-0011 “Conviction Mechanism” literally just addressed operator accountability. Claim 4: “Validators taking 41% of rewards is inefficient” Validation IS the product in a trustless network. Ethereum validators take rewards too. You want decentralization without the cost of decentralization, that’s not how cryptography works. Claim 5: “No incentive for centralized orgs to use TAO” PwC France. SN44. 136 countries. 6-8 months legal due diligence. Venice AI Erik Voorhees. Subnet 4. Live right now. TAO Institute. Institutional-grade research. Launched this week. Grayscale ETF filing. Still active. You wrote this critique without doing complete homework !! The real conclusion: Every criticism in this thread applies equally to Ethereum in 2017. Low revenue. High inflation. Unproven utility. “Theatre.” ETH went from $8 → $4,800. You are not wrong about the risks. But you are just early on the wrong side. I am not here to fool anyone. I am here because I have done the work. And the work says: $TAO is early, not broken. 💎 Thank you for your attention to this matter! Regards, @CryptoAvex
Justin Bons@Justin_Bons

Bittensor is a crypto-ponzi; unsustainable nonsense! TAO has no utility or PMF; it is all driven by token inflation: $328M worth of new tokens are printed annually, yet only $15M in annual revenue was generated! Subsidies from holders pay for subnets; economically bankrupt: 🧵 Token inflation is used to give people the illusion of low cost. As the truth is that creating AI models in a "decentralized" way is far more expensive. While offering no additional utility or benefits It is all theatre; subnets are not created as competitive products. They are created simply to exist & extract as much value out of TAO investors as possible Ponzinomics & Extraction: For example, the Pine Analytics data proved that unsubsidized inference on the Chutes subnet would cost up to 3.5x as much as centralized competitors such as Deepseek or TogetherAI! What makes it all so much worse is that token holders pay for these subnets through inflation. Yet, none of the revenue actually flows back to the token holders. The subnet owners get to keep 100% of the revenue! On top of 18% of emissions, just because... That is a borderline scam, extremely profitable for subnet operators, but setting up token investors for extreme loss when the system inevitably collapses As TAO has a 21M supply limit, which might be appealing to ignorant token investors. But also implies that the network will entirely collapse, as it is fundamentally unsustainable, just like BTC Inefficient & Expensive: The problems run even deeper than that, as is the case with most DePin projects that rely on subsidies rather than real-world value accrual: The reason why decentralized computing is so inefficient is that it requires verification & replication. Within a trustless environment, we cannot simply trust the work done by individual nodes. Instead, the work must be replicated multiple times over, introducing extreme inefficiencies. This is not so bad for simple TX's, but for serious, large computing tasks, this becomes a deal breaker This is why 41% of the rewards go to "validators" whose sole task is to verify that the work being done is legitimate! This only adds to the massive inefficiency already introduced by latency within a distributed network. There are several good reasons why AIs are trained in massive data centers with cards equipped with extremely low-latency, high-bandwidth connections. Something TAO is unable to directly compete with in technical & economic terms Product Theatre: In some cases, it is worth paying a premium for decentralization; one example of this is decentralized storage However, this is not the case for the training of AI's, as this is a one-off cost usually carried out by a centralized for-profit organization. As running the AI itself is much cheaper & even achievable by individuals on a single consumer-grade machine... So, what is the incentive for this centralized organization to use a more expensive method? That does not even result in a commercially viable product, due to the lack of scale... The answer is that there is no legitimate incentive! As there are only so many people they can fool into such a ponzinomic scheme, creating an upper bound on the size these subnets can grow to, which is nowhere near what large centralized AI companies can achieve today Conclusion: There is no future in such a bankrupt design! It is all theatre to extract as much as possible; subnets are not created as competitive products. They are created simply to exist & to extract as much value out of token investors as possible! There is much I did not cover in this critique, including "decentralization theatre", modularity, bad governance, perverse incentives & terrible UX. This critique was purely economic, which is bad enough to reject TAO on that basis alone! As value investors, we have to avoid such nonsense. It is not only dangerous from an investment perspective, but it also harms the industry as a whole. The more we prop up nonsense like this, the more difficult it will be for outsiders to take our industry seriously That is why we must speak out, as we care about crypto's ultimate goals. Financial freedom, censorship resistance, privacy & more Reject the nonsense, as the numbers & facts speak for themselves. Crypto already presents us with such a beautiful dream for the future; let's not spoil our opportunity by wasting our energy on half-baked ideas like TAO Crypto deserves better than that. So, help us spread this message far & wide. As the truth will set us free! 🔥

English
43
52
286
34.3K
CryptoDSK retweetledi
0xSammy
0xSammy@0xSammy·
Covenant decided to leave the TAO ecosystem, taking 8 figs in capital with them The biggest friction point to adoption here is the misalignment in subnet and network interest Very few institutions will deploy serious capital until a tangible solution is in place Here are 10 suggestions that could alleviate this problem: 1. Lock-based subnet ownership as const suggests Founders lock their tokens over multi-year schedules visible on chain. If you believe in what you're building this shouldn't be a problem. Investors get advance warning of any unlock and can reprice accordingly 2. Protocol-level IP retention. If a model is trained using Bittensor emissions and network compute the weights and outputs should be retained by the network Covenant trained a 72B param model on Bittensor resources and took it with them. That shouldn't be possible perhaps can simply be replicated by another subnet, or the same subnet taken over by someone else? 3. On chain revenue sharing Subnets generating revenue from their products should have a percentage AUTOMATICALLY flowing back to alpha holders and TAO stakers Rayon Labs already does something like this with their auto-staking buyback on SN64 (Chutes) with their inference revenue; It should be standard not optional 4. Headless subnet architecture. Remove the dependency on a single founding team entirely The subnet operates as a protocol-level commodity where anyone can contribute compute and development. No one person or team can pull the plug 5. Vesting schedules on founder emission allocation Founders shouldn't be able to sell emissions as they receive them. Vest over 12-24 months minimum so there's a structural commitment to building long term rather than farming and leaving This is somewhat entrenched with dTAO but there are loopholes to this, especially in a bull market 6. Subnet governance minimums Require subnets above a certain market cap or emission share to have multi-sig control, public roadmaps, and regular reporting to stakers Treat it like a public company once you're managing other people's capital 7. Exit penalties or cooldown periods If a founding team wants to exit they face a cooldown where their locked tokens are gradually released rather than dumped. This gives stakers time to reprice and exit before the team does 8. Insurance or protection pools funded by a small percentage of subnet emissions that pay out to alpha holders if a founding team exits or the subnet goes dark. Spreads the risk across the network 9. Portable subnet infrastructure Build the protocol so that if a team leaves the compute layer, model weights, and validation logic remain functional and can be picked up by another team or run autonomously. The subnet survives the founder 10. Reputation and track record scoring on chain Founders who have successfully run subnets long term and honoured their commitments get visible credibility scores. New subnet launches from unproven teams get flagged so stakers know the risk profile before they buy in. None of these are silver bullets on their own but stacking several of them together would go a long way toward making subnet alpha tokens actually investable and keeping value accruing to TAO rather than leaking out every time a team decides to leave I've seen my fair share of fraud in listed organisations as an auditor to know the problem comes from human error, be it "intentional" or otherwise Code is law; "trust me bro" back of the napkin handshakes won't cut it anymore Follow @TAOInstitute_ - the framework we are building will contribute to the gaps identified
0xSammy tweet media
const@const_reborn

Exploits are what teach a system its weak spots. The quicker you find them the faster you learn. The outcome of this eventful evening is that Bittensor will invent lock-based subnet ownership -- specifically: ownership of a subnet determined by a team's long term economic commitment to the project. This will mean: 1) investors see long in advance if an owner has unlocked their tokens, 2) be able to reprice the subnet before the owner and 3) liquidly direct their own conviction to another team, or agent, to manage the system. Thank you @DistStateAndMe for helping further Bittensor's decentralization and develop a solution to one of cryptos oldest problems: founders who rug their token holders. Looking forward to training some 1T param models with the miners who are experts in this unique field. "What is dead can never die"

English
45
40
272
36.7K
CryptoDSK retweetledi
Andy ττ
Andy ττ@bittingthembits·
I am not going to sugarcoat this. Last night hurt $TAO & Subnet holders The founder of Covenant AI decided to cash out of SN3, SN39, and SN81, dumped roughly 37,000 $TAO worth of subnet Alpha on the way out, and cratered prices across the board. $TAO dropped as much as 27%. Nearly $900 million in market cap wiped. $9 million in longs liquidated. Alpha holders on those subnets got absolutely crushed. I was one of them. I lost a significant amount from this. That is the reality and I am not going to pretend otherwise. But I am still here. And I am still buying. Let me tell you why. First, let me be clear about what actually happened. A subnet owner got into a disagreement with Const, got upset, and used it as an excuse to dump his bags on the people who trusted him. That is it. That is the whole story. He dressed it up as a principled stand against centralized governance but the man sold 37,000 $TAO worth of Alpha on his own community while posting a manifesto. That is a rug plain and simple. Const responded within the hour. Publicly. On chain. With a solution. Some people are acting like Bittensor died last night. It did not. Let me show you what actually happened in the hours after the dump. Const proposed lock-based subnet ownership where ownership of a subnet is determined by a team's long-term economic commitment to the project. Not by who registered first. Not by who controls the keys. By who has skin in the game over time. Investors would see in advance if an owner unlocked their tokens. The market could reprice the subnet before the owner dumps. And conviction could be directed to another team or even an agent to manage the system. If implemented, this would be the most significant governance upgrade since dTAO launched. And it came within hours. Not weeks. Not after a committee meeting. Within hours. That is what this network does. It finds its weak spots and it fixes them. Fast. @MacrocosmosAI posted: "Bittensor always emerges stronger from pain. Hacks, exploits, disagreements all fade into the history of this protocol. The flame of distributed training continues to burn brightly. One individual does not make a nation." @jon_durbin from Chutes: "Chutes is and always will be a Bittensor project. Chutes is Bittensor and Bittensor is Chutes." @MaxScore from Score: "Score is and always will be a Bittensor project. Score is Bittensor and Bittensor is Score." Loayei: "Don't care about the drama. Will continue building $TAO." @TroyQuasar from Quasar called it what it was. He said it was bullshit, that no one is bigger than the network, and that Quasar will take it from here. The builders did not leave. The builders doubled down within hours. Publicly. On record. @markjeffrey put it simply: "Bittensor is quite a LOT more than Subnet 3, and $TAO will carry on fine without it. There are 125 other subnets plus three new slots that just freed up." Three new subnet slots just opened. While people were panic selling, builders were already eyeing the open seats. @SiamKidd gave the most grounded take. He acknowledged the drama, acknowledged that Sam's governance concerns were not entirely wrong, but made the point that Const's motives have always been genuine. This is growth. This is what permissionless systems look like when they encounter stress. They break in specific places, they get patched, and they come back harder. This is not the first time something like this has happened on Bittensor. It is not even the second time. Nous Research left the ecosystem before. And what happened? The network adapted, subnets evolved, and the protocol kept building. Every previous inflection point led to upgrades that made the system stronger. Covenant-72B was real. The training was real. Fundamentals haven’t changed: 21M hard cap, halving complete, 68% staked, nine institutional products accumulating, Grayscale ETF pending. $TAO just went on sale at a 27% discount. Builders keep building. I’m buying this dip. $TAO
English
69
153
883
62K
Evan Luthra
Evan Luthra@EvanLuthra·
This is the hardest thing I’ve ever had to write. I’m leaving crypto. Not a break. Not a rebrand. I’m done. Some stuff happened that I can’t talk about yet. Maybe one day. But I need to go. I gave this space everything. It gave me a lot back. But it also took things from me I’ll never get back. To everyone who showed love on my worst days without even knowing… thank you. I mean that. This is my last post.
English
183
17
355
98K
CryptoDSK retweetledi
Erik
Erik@ero_crypto·
⚠️ Reality Check for Crypto – Read Carefully Dear members and crypto community, I’ve nailed multiple tops and bottoms — from the bear market bottom all the way to the top. I publicly warned about the Bitcoin top when most were calling for $150K–$200K–$250K. Now I’m saying something again that many won’t like: 👉 The market is not where you think it is. 📉 Levels most people don’t expect: ◾BTC: $20K–$24K is not just possible — it’s coded ◾ETH: Sub-$800 is coded ◾Altcoins: New lows are coded And if BTC loses $15K: 👉 $12K → $8K → $3K becomes realistic📉 Levels most people don’t expect: Sounds crazy? It always does… until it happens. 🧠 What changed my bias? When BTC hit $126K, I called the top, target I shared a few weeks and months ago — a blow-off top scenario/my exit plan and pink scenario/ I had shared 2 years in advance. At that time, I was still bullish on altcoins. I expected capital rotation from BTC → to some alts./ Highly selective altseason/ But then: ◾Altcoins lost key levels ◾MMSM got activated ◾#TOTAL2 lost HTF key POI zone That’s when I understood: ❌ Rotation is NOT happening 👉 I flipped bullish → bearish Not only on BTC — but on ETH and the entire altcoin market and since december 2025 I started posting bearish charts. Because it became clear: 👉 Altcoins had already topped. 🚨 Hard truth most don’t want to hear: ◾There is NO altseason ◾And very high probability it won’t happen. Why? 👉 BTC & ETH pumped mainly due to ETF-driven flows 👉 Institutions are not rotating into altcoins — unregulated ones. And MM won’t pump old altcoins knowing: ◾There are many holders who bought at higher prices ◾Many have been accumulating during the bear market 👉 That creates constant sell pressure on every move up. 📉 That’s why the play was different: ◾First, they dumped altcoins below bear market lows 👉 to trigger capitulation and shake out liquidity Then: 👉 They pump them x5–x8 But that move? 👉 That’s the top. So waiting blindly for altseason = 👉 Dead time + dead capital 💀 The uncomfortable reality: Most altcoins? 👉 Dead money. As I said 2 years ago, I repeat now: 👉 This cycle won’t just hurt beginners… 👉 It will hurt even OGs Because many are still expecting: x20 x30 x50 👉 That phase is over. 📊 About the “pumps” you’ll still see: Yes, a few altcoins will go parabolic. But not because of a bull market or altseason. 👉 Because of smart money & large players ◾Pump → attract attention ◾Dump → exit liquidity And unless you have insider-level understanding… 👉 You won’t catch these moves/like $RIVER, $PIPPIN, $SIREN etc. 📉 My current view: ◾Altcoins = long-term bear market Altseason = not even close/ most of altcoins chart looks ugly. Nothing bullish there. Market needs major structural recovery For example: 👉 TOTAL2 must reclaim the key level it lost and break its ATH to see #Altseason. But instead… 👉 I see new lows ahead for BTC ETH TOTAL2/alts/. 🎯 My goal is simple: ◾Not to scare you. ◾Not to argue. ◾ Don’t post unrealistic ideas, narratives and charts that don’t reflect market reality. 👉 To protect you. I don’t want: ◾Bitcoin to hurt you ◾Altcoins to destroy your portfolio Trade reality — not hope. Because in this market… 👉 Hope is the most expensive position you can hold.
Erik tweet media
English
4
12
27
1.2K
CryptoDSK retweetledi
Erik
Erik@ero_crypto·
Dear community, this idea does not mean #BITCOIN will dump straight to 38-40> 28–30K, even 22–24K immediately. It’s highly likely we’ll first see a strong bounce from the 54–58K area toward 80–81K or even 83–84K, followed by a continuation lower. I’ll keep you updated. First, let the price reach my POI zones, and based on the price action there, I’ll publish a new TA.
Erik@ero_crypto

Are you watching where I placed the eye and the magnet? There’s a serious reason why those CME gaps will be filled. 😉

English
4
3
29
2.7K
CryptoDSK retweetledi
Erik
Erik@ero_crypto·
From the bull market bottom, I called every major bottom correctly. After 125–126K, I shared multiple blow-off top warnings. Remember who alerted you weeks and months in advance — when most didn’t expect it.
Erik tweet media
Erik@ero_crypto

My #BTC / $BTC masterpiece 😉 — officially entering crypto history 😎📈 lol Follow me and join my TG channel for calls, deep TA, market insights, and everything you need to stay ahead 😎 t.me/erocryptotradi…

English
9
10
22
5K
CryptoDSK retweetledi
Ansem
Ansem@blknoiz06·
avici mode
MoonPay 🟣@moonpay

BREAKING: @AviciMoney now offers 🇺🇸 and 🇪🇺 Named Virtual Accounts powered by @moonpay & @iron 1️⃣ Claim your own named account in the Avici app 2️⃣ Fund fast via SEPA Instant, ACH, Wire, and Direct Deposit 3️⃣ Take full self-custodial control of your money Live now 🚀

Français
101
45
427
66.5K
CryptoDSK retweetledi
Donnie
Donnie@Donnie100x·
We all saw crypto cards come and go. Most ride hype, burn incentives, and vanish the moment emissions stop. But every now and then, something shows up with real product DNA: a clear thesis, early traction, and architecture that actually scales. That’s what makes $AVICI | @AviciMoney worth watching 👇 1. 𝐒𝐩𝐞𝐧𝐝 𝐖𝐢𝐭𝐡𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐒𝐞𝐥𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐠 The core utility is simple but powerful: Hold crypto, get cash. Spend via credit. Avici gives users a secured Visa line that mirrors their on-chain holdings, replacing liquidation and selling pressure with smooth TradFi UX, backed by self-custody. Create custom cards for groceries, flights, subscriptions... even top it up in two minutes with native smart contract routing. If you try it, seems like the front-end feels like Revolut, but the backend is unmistakably on-chain. 2. 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐏𝐞𝐨𝐩𝐥𝐞´𝐬 𝐁𝐚𝐧𝐤 Most projects chasing the “People’s Bank” narrative fall apart at first contact with usability. Avici doesn’t. @CryptoKaduna called it early and he was right to. Avici is building a financial primitive that’s not extractive and people can actually use. Tools that finally move capital with dignity and efficiency instead of being full of fees (gas, hidden or whatever) and frictions. You try it once and you stop using anything else to spend your crypto. That’s the virtuous feedback loop. 3. 𝐈𝐧𝐜𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐞𝐬 𝐀𝐥𝐢𝐠𝐧𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 The most underappreciated aspect of Avici is probably the structure behind it. Team tokens unlock only at concrete milestones: → $100M → $1B → $5B Even then, they’re locked until 2029. @Cryptoaeon put it best: this is how you align incentives between teams and token holders. Long-term conviction written directly into the vesting schedule. That’s rare. 4. 𝐀𝐧 𝐄𝐚𝐫𝐥𝐲 𝐑𝐞𝐯𝐨𝐥𝐮𝐭 𝐖𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐂𝐫𝐲𝐩𝐭𝐨 𝐑𝐚𝐢𝐥𝐬 ?! @MoneyLord dropped a bomb with that take... and the more you look, the more it tracks. → Revolut started with FX + spending → Added equity, crypto, credit → Built a UX layer over fractured finance Avici is starting from crypto-first, plugging into the same TradFi layer, but giving users full custody, smart routing, and on-chain transparency from day one. Revolut now sits at $75B. Avici? Around $35M. 5. 𝐋𝐨𝐨𝐤𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐀𝐡𝐞𝐚𝐝: 𝐂𝐫𝐞𝐝𝐢𝐭 𝐒𝐜𝐨𝐫𝐞𝐬 & 𝐌𝐨𝐫𝐭𝐠𝐚𝐠𝐞𝐬 More than card company, this is a settlement layer for on-chain identity, spending, and credit. The roadmap includes on-chain credit scoring and even crypto-native mortgages: a first-of-its-kind leap into real-world DeFi. If they land it, we’re talking about the first full-stack consumer crypto bank with actual product velocity. It looks early now. But the design speaks to late-stage discipline. Question is: if you missed Revolut… are you gonna miss this one too?
Donnie tweet mediaDonnie tweet mediaDonnie tweet mediaDonnie tweet media
English
32
43
268
20.8K
CryptoDSK retweetledi
MoonPay 🟣
MoonPay 🟣@moonpay·
BREAKING: @AviciMoney now offers 🇺🇸 and 🇪🇺 Named Virtual Accounts powered by @moonpay & @iron 1️⃣ Claim your own named account in the Avici app 2️⃣ Fund fast via SEPA Instant, ACH, Wire, and Direct Deposit 3️⃣ Take full self-custodial control of your money Live now 🚀
English
379
691
2K
472.2K
CryptoDSK retweetledi
Karamata_ 💎
Karamata_ 💎@Karamata2_2·
🔥 Daily volumes are increasing parabolically, while $AVICI ’s price chart has been moving sideways in accumulation near the bottom for nearly three weeks. - $AVICI ’s MACD program is signaling the end of the downtrend -> transition into accumulation -> preparation for a technical rebound -> momentum for the next bullish rotation. - OBV is stabilizing. - Major horizontal support is holding around the 2.5–2.8 zone. The lack of market liquidity has impacted investor sentiment, but spending via the $AVICI card has become an essential part of users’ daily activity. Revolut’s mcap is $75B, while $AVICI’s current mcap is $36M. A new rally is ready to unfold at any time from the current bottom zone.
Karamata_ 💎 tweet mediaKaramata_ 💎 tweet media
Avici@AviciMoney

$6M in total card spend. Thankful for every one of you.🖤 endbanks.org/share/5w707j70…

English
17
7
55
11.8K
CryptoDSK retweetledi
CryptoDoc
CryptoDoc@ElCryptoDoc·
Everything is down, yet $AVICI is up 29%. Study why. This is a perfect example of smart money taking advantage of oversold conditions. Identifying and positioning into winners should be the main priority RN. Because eventually the markets will heat up again, and winners like @AviciMoney will outperform!
CryptoDoc tweet media
English
12
2
34
3.2K
CryptoDSK
CryptoDSK@CryptoDsk·
@gem_insider $AVICI - great utility / use case, 100% owned by holders (MetaDAO project). Coded for billions imo.
English
1
0
1
12
💎GEM INSIDER💎
💎GEM INSIDER💎@gem_insider·
POV: you have $100K to buy ONE token, what would you buy? 🤑 1. $SACHI 6. $WOJAK 2. $ASTER 7. $AVICI 3. $AURA 8. #SPX6900 4. $TROLL 9. $USELESS 5. $MOMO 10. you write
English
158
33
144
25.9K
CryptoDSK retweetledi
Decentralize Or Die
Decentralize Or Die@DecentrlizOrDie·
$AVICI is an early stage fintech company larping as a crypto coin. Dont get confused by the wrapper and dont treat it like one. Study early fintech for clarity ( I've written comps about this- read post below)
Rafi_0x@Rafi_0x

A lot of people instantly turned bearish when @RamXBT mentioned Avici might raise again soon This isn’t a traditional crypto “raise.” This is a fintech scaling moment, and the context matters Early-stage fintechs like: - Revolut - Wise - Stripe - CashApp - N26 All raised multiple rounds early because scaling financial infrastructure is expensive: ✅ licensing ✅ compliance ✅ payment rails ✅ virtual account partners ✅ settlement infrastructure ✅ fraud prevention ✅ card issuing ✅ treasury ops The fact that @AviciMoney is already processing millions per month makes it normal that they raise for scaling their infra. Raising money to support hypergrowth is bullish, not bearish It means the product is working too well that they need more capacity and imo that’s the best problem a startup can have... + the sale will only happen IF holders approve it, this is why Futarchy matters This part is what most people ignore, Avici cannot raise anything unless OWNERS approve it via Futarchy This isn’t: ❌ founders deciding ❌ backroom deals ❌ VC allocation insider dumping ❌ traditional ICO dilution Instead, it's: ✅ holders voting ✅ market outcomes deciding ✅ aligned incentives ✅ transparent proposals This is exactly why @MetaDAOProject Futarchy is 10x superior to ICO models, holders control the dilution, the raise, and the structure, Founders cannot force anything In any other crypto project, the founder would simply announce the raise and dilute you If the raise accelerates growth, so ownership becomes more valuable If the raise is unnecessary, then holders reject it, and no dilution happens This creates a smart filter, only the raises that increase owner value ever get approved Most people are bearish because they still think in old-ICO mental models People associate new raises with team dilution, greed, mismanagement, supply nuking, rug potential, desperation, etc But none of this applies here because: 1⃣ Avici is not a “hype token,” it is a scaling fintech 2⃣ Futarchy prevents founders from diluting without approval 3⃣ All details will be on-chain and market-validated 4⃣ Raises fund infra expansion, not runway 5⃣ Growth metrics justify scaling spending People will eventually realize that you can't compare Avici to meme projects... You have to compare it to real fintech companies that scale like startups Made this TLDR below, picking the best parts from the article for anyone interested: ➡️ $2.9M credit created (2×), $2.5M spend volume (3×), 55k transactions (3×), 16.2k MAU (2×). For month 2, these numbers are insane and show real product-market fit ➡️ People aren’t just testing the card; they’re actively using it. High retention this early is rare in fintech and signals long-term stickiness ➡️ Named virtual accounts + MoonPay partnership are the biggest unlock so far: Off-ramps now arrive as normal bank transfers under the user’s own name. ➡️ Biz cards + institutional-grade Solana wallet infra shipped: This expands Avici from consumer fintech into business + high-value money flows ➡️ Public dashboards, viral marketing, new dev hires, new infra, LATAM GTM, all in one month ➡️ Some issues still need fixing but they’re transparent about it: Card balance withdrawal bugs, better wallet analytics, LATAM focus ➡️ Revenue is growing but they are reinvesting everything for marketshare: Interchange + card sales are already meaningful, but the plan is to use it as cashback ➡️ Team supply / new raise will be proposed transparently: Proposal likely Dec/Jan, and holders will need to approve it, this is why Futarchy matters ➡️ “Avi” is coming, personalization + deeper user experience: They want Avici to become people’s financial home, not just a spending card. More personalization = higher retention and bigger revenue per user ➡️ Metal cards + cashback targeting high spenders: Once spend volume 2-3×, interchange becomes big enough to reward users aggressively ➡️ They will double down on global + localized branding now that people get the narrative The People’s bank Ownership Supercycle

English
5
8
68
6.7K
CryptoDSK retweetledi
MoneyLord
MoneyLord@MoneyLord·
Avici trades like a stock Peoples bank Decoupled from the market There is a reason for that Metadao made a way to launch a token at fair fdv for people Where people win, not VC, not Kols, but PEOPLE Then you add a top-notch product on top of it, a dev that overdelivers, a product that is getting insane adoption Billions for AVICI
MoneyLord tweet media
English
26
27
121
5.5K