温馨提示：本站仅提供公开网络链接索引服务，不存储、不篡改任何第三方内容，所有内容版权归原作者所有
AI智能索引来源：http://www.bee.com/id/53659.html
点击访问原文链接

When VCs press the sell button: The wealth transfer game behind the Polychain sell-off | Bee Network

进入原网站 导航首页
When VCs press the sell button: The wealth transfer game behind the Polychain sell-off | Bee Network Login Berita Trending Meme Launchpad Agen AI DeSci Penjelajah Rantai Atas Untuk Newbee 100x Koin Permainan Lebah Situs Web Penting APLIKASI yang Harus Dimiliki Selebriti Kripto DePIN Pemula Penting Detektor Perangkap Alat Dasar Situs Web Tingkat Lanjut Pertukaran Alat NFT Hai, Keluar Alam Semesta Web3 permainan DApp Sarang lebah Platform Berkembang IKLAN Mencari Bahasa inggris Isi Ulang Koin Gabung Unduh Universitas Web3 permainan DApp Sarang lebah IKLAN rumah-Analisis-Teks utama When VCs press the sell button: The wealth transfer game behind the Polychain sell-offAnalisis8 bulan yang lalu更新Wyatt 25,0741 39 Penulis asli: Pavel Paramonov

Terjemahan asli: TechFlow

This article discusses the recent situation between @celestia Dan @polychain where Polychain sold $242M worth of $TIA. I’ll explore the pros and cons of this, and what lessons we can learn from it.

Original tweet link: click here

Did you anticipate that investors would not make money? Many people (including excellent researchers) believe that this Polychain incident is extremely predatory and full of uncertainty. How can a primary fund sell such a large allocation into the open market and damage the price?

First, Polychain is a venture fund whose job is to make money from liquid assets that it buys when liquidity is illiquid (I can’t believe I’m saying this).

The risk of Polychain investing in Celestia was not only its early stage, but also the early stage of concepts such as external data availability layers. At the time, the concept was still new and many people (especially “Ethereum supporters”) did not believe in it.

Imagine if you had discovered Spotify in 2008 and believed that people would listen to music through streaming services instead of CDs and MP3 players: you would have been called crazy. This is what it feels like to raise money when you are not only a newcomer but also want to operate and create a new market in data availability throughput.

Polychain’s job is to take risks and reap rewards, just like everyone else. Founders take the risk of creating a company that might fail, and people make choices and take risks every day.

Everything we do involves making choices and taking risks, the only difference being the nature and size of the risk.

Polychain is not the only venture capital fund that is investing, there are many different venture capital firms.

Interestingly, no one blames them because it is more difficult to find their transaction data. However, the sell-off of Polychain alone would not cause such a serious data crash. It should be pointed out that this hatred directed only at Polychain is undeserved because:

Their job is to take risks and make money, and they do it well.

They were not the only ones selling, there were other investors as well.

Are these moves good for investors? Yes.

Are these actions ethical for the community? You know the answer.

Did you anticipate that the team would not make any money? Well, you probably did expect that. There’s a big problem with profitability in kriptocurrencies: most protocols don’t make money themselves, and they don’t even consider profitability. According to defillama, Celestia currently makes about $200 a day (about the salary of a lead software engineer in Eastern Europe) and has issued about $570,000 in token rewards.

This is just the team’s on-chain PL. We know nothing about their off-chain PL, but I believe that such a large-scale team is also very costly. At present, there are indeed some KOLs who say righteously: Web3 protocols should be profitable, and companies should make money. Are we crazy to hear such remarks?

Yes we do, the main problem is not the business model. The main problem is that some teams treat token sales as profits and build business models based on them without considering the consequences.

If token sales equal business models, then there is no need to consider business models and cash flows, right? Yes, but investors’ money is not infinite, and tokens are not infinite.

Venture capital, meanwhile, invests in startups that have a high probability of becoming wildly successful. Many of these companies aren’t profitable yet, but they may offer something revolutionary or interesting enough to entice others to explore and develop those ideas.

Anyway, you wouldnt expect the core team to sell tokens, right? Heres the thing: when your protocol isnt profitable, you have to make money from somewhere else. The foundation has to sell some of its own tokens to pay for infrastructure, employee salaries, and a whole host of other expenses.

Original tweet link: click here

At least paying fees is one of the reasons to sell, I would like to believe. There are many other reasons and different perspectives to consider: on one hand, they abandoned their community; on the other hand, they built this protocol and created a lot of hype around it, so maybe they should at least sell something? Sell means part of it, not all of it.

Ultimately, this is a token/equity question, which is why crypto VCs don’t like equity very much. Selling in the public market is easier and has a shorter time frame than private placement or waiting for an exit.

Token economics is not the main issue, the token is Clearly, investors are increasingly favoring token trading over stocks. We live in the age of digital assets, so investing in digital assets is a good choice, isn’t it?

This trend is not always as simple as it seems. Interestingly, many founders themselves realize that their products may not need tokens and would prefer to raise funds through equity. Despite this, they often face two major challenges:

As I said before, most crypto native venture VCs don’t like equity (because exits are harder)

Equity valuations are usually lower than token valuations, so people want to raise more money

This situation not only creates a dilemma, it also actively incentivizes people to choose the token model. Token issuance satisfies more investors because it provides a clear exit strategy to the public market, which in turn makes it easier to raise funds. For the team, it means higher valuations and more funds available for development.

Your company’s core values remain intact. You can retain 100% of your equity while raising significant amounts of capital through these “artificial” tokens. This approach also attracts a wider range of investors focused on token investment opportunities.

Unfortunately, in the current landscape, the token model makes retail investors poor and VCs rich in 99% of cases. Or, as @yashhsm put it: infrastructure/governance tokens are memecoins in suits.

However, when $TIA was launched, it brought huge returns to retail investors, soaring from $2 to $20. People thanked the team for making them rich and staked tokens to get different airdrops. Yes, we had such a moment, it was in the fall of 2023…

After the price started to drop, people suddenly started spreading a lot of FUD about Celestia: rumors about weird team behavior, predatory token economics, mocking on-chain revenue, etc.

It’s good when problems are pointed out, but it’s bad if those who once praised Celestia now dismiss it as a “shithole” simply because of price action.

What conclusions can we draw from this situation? VCs are rarely your friends. Their core business is making money, your core business is also making money, and the core interest of VCs’ LPs is also making money.

Don’t blame the VCs who sold their tokens: their tokens are unlocked, they have full ownership of the asset, and they can do with them as they please.

Blame the VCs who are selling their coins while writing on Twitter about how much they want these tokens: this is deception and should not be tolerated.

The business model should not be centered around token sales alone. Find a profitable model, or even if the technology is great, people will still buy it if it is not profitable.

The token economy is open to everyone: if a team unlocks the tokens, they have full ownership of their assets and can do with them as they please. However, if you are confident in what you are building, selling large allocations may be a questionable decision.

Equity investments are less popular and some token valuations are artificial and not based on any metrics.

Teams should pay close attention to token economics in the early stages as this could cost them dearly in the future.

Technological innovation has nothing to do with token prices.

When it goes up the charts, people are happy; when it goes down the charts, some problems become apparent. It would be bad if people who once praised the project now hate it.

Dont be obsessed with baggage, love technology, and believe in something.

This article is sourced from the internet: When VCs press the sell button: The wealth transfer game behind the Polychain sell-off

Related: Web3 lawyer reveals: What kind of RWA do you understand? Recently, discussions about the RWA project have been heated in major Web3 communities. Industry observers on the Internet often put forward the conclusion that RWA will reconstruct the new financial ecology of Hong Kong, and believe that relying on the existing regulatory framework of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, this track will usher in a breakthrough development. In the process of communicating and discussing with colleagues, Crypto Salad found that everyone has been arguing about the so-called compliance issue recently, and the understanding of the question of what is compliance is also different. There is always a situation where the public has its own reasons and the woman has her own reasons. This phenomenon is actually based on the fact that there are still differences in the understanding of…

Analisis #Tetesan Udara ## kriptoDefinisi ## ethereumPasar #Startup ## Tanda# web3© 版权声明Array 上一篇 More than just trading, HyperLiquids early GameFi and SocialFi projects 下一篇 WealthBee Macro Monthly Report: The first half of 2025 has come to an end. Which main themes will create the new encrypt 相关文章 BaruERC-5564: Ethereum’s Stealth Era Has Arrived, Receiving Addresses No Longer ‘Exposed’ 6086cf14eb90bc67ca4fc62b 565 7 ways experienced crypto investors print money in a bear market 6086cf14eb90bc67ca4fc62b 17,344 1 Murad, the reigning top trading signal provider: 116 reasons why a bull market is coming in 2026. 6086cf14eb90bc67ca4fc62b 19,456 3 Secara aktif memperluas bisnis AI, Tether mencari tambang emas berikutnya setelah USDT 6086cf14eb90bc67ca4fc62b 38,781 1 When Bitcoin Returns to the 60k Range: What Signals Is the Market Awaiting After an Oversold Decline? | Guest Analysis 6086cf14eb90bc67ca4fc62b 8,045 1 Six years into the stablecoin wave, this is the nascent form of the future of payments he sees. 6086cf14eb90bc67ca4fc62b 14,394 1 komentar Anda harus login untuk meninggalkan komentar! Segera masuk Onyekachi Ojeogu Tamu That’s good

8 bulan yang lalu Bee.com Portal Web3 terbesar di dunia Mitra KoinCarp binance KoinMarketCap KoinGecko hidup koin Armor Unduh Aplikasi Bee Network dan mulai perjalanan web3 Kertas putih Peran Pertanyaan Umum © 2021-2026. Semua Hak Cipta Dilindungi Undang-Undang. Kebijakan pribadi | Ketentuan Layanan Unduh Aplikasi Jaringan Lebah dan memulai perjalanan web3 Portal Web3 terbesar di dunia Mitra CoinCarp Binance CoinMarketCap CoinGecko Coinlive Armors Kertas putih Peran Pertanyaan Umum © 2021-2026. Semua Hak Cipta Dilindungi Undang-Undang. Kebijakan pribadi | Ketentuan Layanan Mencari MencariDi dalam SitusDi RantaiSosialBerita 热门推荐： Pemburu Airdrop Analisis data Selebriti Kripto Detektor Perangkap Bahasa Indonesia English 繁體中文 简体中文 日本語 Tiếng Việt العربية 한국어 हिन्दी اردو Русский Bahasa Indonesia

智能索引记录