Interstellar-108

US DeFi Renaissance

This year there is only one wallet project we’ve been buying into and that’s $VULT. The product just works.

Only been buying and have not sold any $HYPE

@asparagoid Wen The Return of the Mouse?

I used to have a friend from X who looked like this I have not seen him in 2 months Has anyone seen him?

@taran @storysylee 🤣 “future decacorn founder”

No OTC selling or fees here. I'm a plain and simple spot buyer/holder. @storysylee is one the most prolific tech entrepreneurs - a future decacorn founder. Dont remain sidelined in coins trading under ico price and instead long the future of IP on the blockchain. $IP

@SumoKuji Feels good I guess? 🤣

I’ve been out of the loop….is there any value accrual to $ATOM if any of this mega companies launch a Cosmos chain?

One of the biggest red flags in crypto: founders who are constantly in other projects' replies and Discords. Makes you wonder—who’s shipping their own product? The best builders? Heads down, building and growing their community. Not farming engagement elsewhere.

@AirdropGlideapp Data availability is not the same as asset availability

It's crazy that you still can't IBC transfer $TIA and it's been over a week now.

@celestia Data availability is just a word for exit liquidity

The Celestia Foundation has worked with Polychain Capital to assign Polychain’s entire remaining TIA holdings to new investors. This month, the Foundation purchased 43,451,616.09 TIA from Polychain Capital for $62.5m. Polychain will shortly be undelegating their entire staked TIA holdings in order to settle this transaction. To ensure neutral impact to the Foundation’s financial position, the Foundation is finalizing assignment of this TIA to new investors. These transactions will use a rolling unlock schedule, with the first unlock starting on 16 August and completing on 14 November.

@mdudas Forget data availability. The future is exit liquidity

@0xBalloonLover exit liquidity is more important than data availability

raising from polychain is doing a deal with the devil they will teach you the art of the token but also take advisory on the side and immediately dump whenever they can to them, the shape of the chart is a feature not a bug

@Airdrops_one @celestia Textbook maximal value extraction

Those $TIA Airdrops🪂? Are not coming after all. GG. 🗳️@celestia to blow up the staking model forum.celestia.org/t/proof-of-gov… tl;dr Too little, too late, too chaotic, and seems to be yet another camouflaged attempt at hiding lack of demand. What it means for you 🔸 $TIA Stakers go from earning yield to earning nothing. 🔸 Inflation slashed ~95% to just 0.25 % of supply per year, and all new $TIA routed to validators. 🔸 With staking obsolete, all of ~378.6M staked $TIA will become liquid 🔸 Just pure sell pressure waiting to hit the market. 🔸 Validators still get their cut (via off-chain selection), but retail stakers? Left holding the bag… if they don’t exit first. 🔸 Slashing, liquid-staking tokens, and regular delegations disappear. Why (allegedly) 🔸Token supply bloat: $TIA has lost ~93% from its peak amid high issuance pressure.  🔸Reduce sell-pressure: Less issuance = fewer hands dumping for profit.  The awkward footnote 🔸Alleged reports point to sizable movement from team-linked and early wallets to CEXs. (feel free to dig.) Hard not to view this sudden "protect holders" pivot as… conveniently timed. NOTE: The proposal must pass to take effect, so it’s not finalized yet. 🫡

@AirdropGlideapp Initiated

Anyone remember Initia?

@AirdropGlideapp Hey but proof of liquidity works

The rise and fall of Berachain will be studied. TVL leaving almost as quickly as it entered. Even Stride is moving on from stBGT, saying goodbye to the ecosystem.

@asparagoid In the future you’ll be able to upload your mind and split them into 286,000 drives

I love all my followers equally. When I die, I will be chopped into 286,000 pieces. Then, each piece will be put into special crystal necklaces. Then, each necklace will be sent to your home address for you to wear forever

@stacy_muur But proof of liquidity works

Berachain: From $0 to $3.5B in 90 days. Then $2B gone in six weeks. Discuss.

@paramonoww But the tech works lmao

Polychain invested ~$20m in Celestia and sold more than $80m worth of tokens just from staking rewards. They made >4x without selling their main investment.

@zerokn0wledge_ @celestia TLDR every single new user who invested their own money and time in the history of Celestia since TGE is down bad, very bad. Meanwhile we keep hearing shit like the tech works lmao.

Celestia is great tech. Unfortunaely $TIA is one of the worst / most predatory VC tokens out there. Here is why ↓ First off, @celestia (the chain) is great tech. It was Celestia that first made cheap blobspace abundant, overcoming the main scaling bottleneck that rollups have suffered under for years. The team also put in a huge effort on the marketing front, basically coining the entire modular narrative single-handedly, and attracting an entire ecosystem of talented builders, both across (adjacent) infrastructure layer or the app layer. But what about the token? This is where things take a dark turn. Why? The venture capital rounds tell a stark story of insider privilege. Let me explain: Series A investors paid just $0.0955 per token while Series B investors paid $1.00. When TIA launched to the public at $2.29-$2.50, retail investors were already paying >20x what the earliest VCs paid. Even with TIA’s catastrophic 95% decline from its peak, Series A investors remain up 14-17x on their initial investment, having seen returns as high as 218x at the February 2024 peak of $20. This pricing structure means that while retail investors who bought at launch are underwater by 40-60%, while every single institutional investor still remains deeply profitable. The asymmetry is by design, not accident. That’s supported by a token distribution that heavily favors insiders with 80% allocated to team, investors, and foundation versus just 20% for public participants. The unlock schedule on these allocations creates predictable selling events: - October 30, 2024: A massive unlock of 175.59 million TIA tokens represented 80% of the then-circulating supply - Monthly unlocks continue through 2027, with 30 million tokens releasing monthly through October 2025 - Early backers received 33% of their tokens after year one, with the remaining 67% unlocking during year two This creates what researchers have eatinated as an average 12% inflation rate from unlocks alone during months 24-60 of the project. The structural selling pressure is not a side effect, it’s literally the primary feature of the tokenomics design. Things get worse though. Much worse. The most damning example is @polychaincap, which invested approximately $20 million across Series A and B rounds. Through the staking rewards loophole (see screenshot below), Polychain already sold over $82 million worth of TIA (achieving a 4x return on investment) before a single one of their primary tokens has unlocked (also see comments for more info on this). Wow that’s pretty wild, no? Unfortunately, there is more. Much more. Celestia launched with an 8% annual inflation rate that decreases by 10% yearly until reaching 1.5%. This mechanism appears reasonable on paper but becomes predatory when combined with the token distribution. With only 25% of tokens initially circulating, the 8% inflation effectively adds 33% more tokens to the circulating supply in the first year. Research modeling shows that this inflation pressure escalates from 1.1 million tokens per month to over 7 million tokens monthly during major unlock periods, and that the network requires > $2 million in monthly fee revenue just to offset this selling pressure (while it currently makes about $200 per day!). So let’s quickly recap the situation so far: - High inflation dilutes existing holders at 8% annually - Massive periodic unlocks flood the market with supply - Liquid staking rewards from locked tokens provide immediate selling opportunities What this ultimately means? They rewarded their early investors and themselves at the expense of retail, and keeo dismissing legitimate concerns as “ridiculous FUD” when the token is down >95%. Mustafa’s post below, claiming all tokens see 95% drawdowns and that critics spread “ridiculous FUD” further reinforces this, showing a worrying indifference for the losses of the people that should ultimately be the ones using the (app)chains built on Celestia. All just a coincidence? Possible but unlikely. Because even when compared to other heavily VC-fundes peers, Celestia’s tokenomics stand out as particularly extractive: - Celestia: 80% insider allocation, 20% public - Aptos: 49% insider allocation, 51% public - Ethereum: 83.47% sold to public in crowdsale - Bitcoin/YFI: 100% fair launch with no insider allocations Combined with the staking rewards loophole and aggressive unlock schedule, this 80/20 distro creates a perfect storm for value extraction. This inevitably leads to a system where retail investors serve primarily as exit liquidity for venture capital funds. So is it all over for $TIA? No, but things are not looking great. There are various proposals aiming to radically alter/improve the tokenomics, including reducing inflation by 33% or abandoning the PoS consensus (where the chain currently heavily overpays for security) entirely. Admissions that the current structure is fundamentally broken. However, with Series A investors still up 14-17x despite a 95% price decline, the damage to retail has already been done and trust can likely not be repaired. A price that Celestia (even tho largely a B2B business model) will likely pay in the long-term, as the entire ecosystem suffers under a damaged reputation, regardless of the great tech. That there is literally 0 organic demand for the token or utility beyond governance (which is a meme, especially if 80% of tokens went to insiders) and paying for (almost free) DA makes things even worse. The counter-thesis to $TIA is $HYPE. No insiders and VCs dumping on retail from day 1. Clear token utility, fueling organic demand, millions in daily holder revenue, and low inflation that is also countered by a baked-in buyback mechanism. Proof that not "every token" does a -95% from peak. The key takeaway for builders? It’s easy to make yourself and your VC frens rich by dumping on retail at an artificial 200x valuation. But if you’re here to “change the game” or “build for the long-term”, you have to acknowledge that your token is ALSO a core product, and will ALSO define the success of your tech. Regardless of a $100m “war chest” full of VC funds that will be there to pay handsome salaries. Yet the question remains: how much do you actually care if you already made all the retirement money you could have dreamed of?

@frag_dude Because of your attack we are thinking of changing this to veto

"If it's not an OG team I am voting down or have no interest, thank you". In Germany we have a saying: "Was der Bauer nicht kennt, frisst er nicht" (What the farmer does not know he doesn't eat) It literally means the dumbest people are the ones not open to anything new.

@KentonC137 @AutoStakeThor Well the whole point about decentralized chains is anyone new and external to the current ecosystem can buy into the governance token and exercise influence over the ecosystem. So what’s the concern here? App builders can’t convince their commmunity to buy into the network token?

"Meantime, there is one thing we plan to do that will help our community gain some more influence over the network. We will implement a RUNE LST product, allowing people to bond with selected Node Operators, as easily as it is currently to stake and unstake KUJI (100% via smart contract, permissionless, no-need to DM anyone, no minimum size restriction). We will be able to whitelist the Node Operators with whom the RUNE are being bonded, and this will give us the opportunity to create/growth more Rujira-aligned nodes." This sounds more like a hostile takeover attempt of THORChain vs the other way around. If team RUJI can aquire lots of THORChain nodes without having any exposure to the RUNE price, but a large exposure to the RUJI price, then it would be in those node operators interest to sacrifice the RUNE price to benefit the RUJI price. I'm not looking to start a Twitter war. We should chat about it on a Space and understand where we are each coming from.

@technologypoet The same folks telling us to use paper straws are the same ones flying their private jets everywhere