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/zh/61610.html
点击访问原文链接

We may have misunderstood $JESSE; it’s generating revenue for the Base chain. | Bee Network

进入原网站 导航首页
We may have misunderstood $JESSE; it’s generating revenue for the Base chain. | Bee Network Login 熱門新聞 Meme Launchpad AI 代理商 DeSci 熱門鏈瀏覽器 新人必讀 衝百倍幣 蜜蜂遊戲 必備網站 必備APP 必關大神 DePIN 新人必備 教我避坑 基本工具 深度網站 交易所 NFT 工具 你好， 登出 Web3宇宙 遊戲 DApp 蜂巢 增長平台 生態 搜尋 英語 Coins儲值 登入 下載 Web3大學 遊戲 DApp 蜂巢 生態 家•分析•We may have misunderstood $JESSE; it’s generating revenue for the Base chain. We may have misunderstood $JESSE; it’s generating revenue for the Base chain.分析3 个月前更新懷亞特 15,192 4

Original translation: Deep Tide TechFlow

Content coins may be the only way to get Rollups excited about creators. But be aware that the big players always win.

Crypto Twitter’s reaction to the launch of $JESSE was not friendly:

(The tweet above is actually one of the more rational and down-to-earth criticisms I’ve seen.)

Others pointed out some issues:

Poor timing : The launch coincided with an article by David Phelps, in which he complained that Base was too focused on creator tokens; Extraction issue : Some believe that $JESSE extracts a large amount of transaction fees from sales; The issue of frantic buying : Because $JESSE used the Zora x Doppler bond curve auction mechanism, it unexpectedly attracted a large number of buyers.

But I don’t agree with these concerns.

The timing was indeed a bit unfortunate, but I suspect that Jesse had already planned the release time and chose his birthday as the special occasion.

The withdrawal argument is also untenable. During his birthday livestream, he was able to reinvest the fees into other creators on Base. He also claimed that he had no intention of selling the tokens.

Ultimately, Doppler and 11AM had a very good discussion about the issue of the flash sale:

We will explore the advantages and disadvantages of different auction mechanisms in more detail next week, but Austin’s research on auction mechanisms far surpasses that of those who complain about the rush to buy on X (formerly Twitter).

If it wasn’t out of malice, why would Jesse do that?

The real reason for promoting creator tokens

Most of the sorter revenue for Rollup comes from transaction fees.

To date, Base has earned more revenue from meme token trading than from any other activity. The issuance of new tokens and the resulting speculative trading volume are significant drivers of transaction fees.

來源： Allium

It’s highly likely that Base is spending more than ever before on its core team, funding, events, proprietary applications (such as the Base App), and support for its founders. However, these expenditures haven’t significantly increased Base’s contribution to Coinbase’s financial statements as a rollup.

Creator tokens and content tokens are a very clever solution to this problem:

Their issuance even exceeded that of meme tokens (token issuance is the main battleground for Rollups). They can stimulate trading and speculative activities; They are built by converting attention into on-chain fees, and almost anything that can go viral can be tagged with a content token. Unlike meme tokens, they don’t even require any underlying economic activity, community support, or commitment.

While users view soaring gas fees as a negative, from a Rollup’s perspective, creating an excessive demand for block space is actually a sign of success.

No other form of monetization for creators can achieve the same effect:

Payments : Transactions of any form of payment (such as donations) are insufficient, especially payments to creators. 獎勵 : Base does use reward mechanisms to support the Base App ecosystem, but these rewards have a negligible impact on revenue. Advertising : There are almost no ads on the chain, so they cannot contribute to the sorter fee. Are creator tokens really a good thing?

We’ve learned why creator tokens are a key area of focus for Base, but are they really the best mechanism for users and creators?

Source: Zora Docs

The flywheel effect logic of creator tokens is simple:

If you publish content, a Content Coin will be generated, and you will own 1% of its supply. Each content token can only be purchased with your Creator Coin. If you issue Creator Coins, you will hold 50% of their supply (unlocked gradually). The demand for content tokens will naturally drive the demand for creator tokens. This mechanism incentivizes you to create high-quality content while earning rewards through holding creator tokens and transaction fees.

In some ways, content tokens behave similarly to Patreon’s membership subscriptions. If you spend $1,000 to purchase a content token, your opportunity cost is the potential return on that $1,000 invested in other markets. The forgone returns are essentially like paying a creator subscription fee. In return, the creator may reward you for holding these tokens. These rewards could be tiered like Patreon’s, or distributed proportionally or randomly (like a lottery).

However, creators don’t directly receive subscription fees unless they sell their own creator tokens. Therefore, even if your costs are paid through a revenue-generating subscription, not all costs are effectively passed on to the creators you support unless they “cash out” (i.e., “rug”). Jesse also points out this issue:

Furthermore, content coins also possess attributes similar to fan collectibles. As an artist’s popularity increases, the rewards they can offer to “subscribers” become more valuable. Therefore, content coins have a speculative element. Even if you don’t care about supporting an artist or earning rewards, you might still buy content coins simply to speculate on their potential future reward value (whether material or non-material). This is similar to buying a first-edition CD from your favorite artist, which you might resell at a higher price in the future.

However, this characteristic of creator tokens also brings significant drawbacks : they have essentially become a financial instrument, and their market may attract institutional participants who possess more advanced tools than ordinary fans.

Just as true fans need discerning eyes, patience, and dedication to identify, preserve, and invest in classic CDs or related merchandise, the market for content tokens also needs genuine fans to support it. On the other hand, a savvy trader can profit from content tokens simply by using flash sales or other speculative methods.

When you exit a “membership,” you need to sell tokens, which creates slippage. Ironically, the lower the liquidity of creator tokens, or the greater your contribution to the creator, the higher the slippage you face. Content tokens, in a way, penalize the most generous sponsors.

The house always wins.

My core problem with the creator token model is that it attempts to combine sponsorship 和 curation to maximize transaction volume, but it may end up with the worst of both.

True sponsors have to deal with issues such as price volatility, adversarial market participants, and transaction taxes. Curators lack clear guarantees for future rewards because creator tokens are not explicitly tied to creator equity or other value streams. In effect, curators are speculating on potential demand for unknown future rewards. This model tends to place creators’ revenue upfront , which may result in significant transaction fees during the initial price discovery phase, but the sustainability of long-term transaction volume is uncertain ($JESSE’s performance will be a point of observation). This mechanism does not truly achieve incentive alignment between creators and token holders.

The end result is that the underlying blockchain and trading venue (in this case, Uniswap) extract far more revenue than a simple membership-based payment solution would.

You could argue that the curatorial market does offer an additional function, but the two (sponsorship and curation) cannot be clearly separated.

In contrast, we can examine Craig Mod’s model. He built his own membership system, focusing on keeping the setup as streamlined as possible, and succeeded.

He can proudly say that no one has lost their hard-earned money for supporting him.

What attracts me to Craig’s model is that it focuses on the creation itself (such as books), rather than the content or the creator personally.

Personally, I believe that a creator economy centered on interaction is less effective than a model based on the exchange of genuine value . Content should merely be a discovery mechanism and a means of public creation, not the core product. To some extent, a free, foundational tier can be provided for users to experience.

I also believe these problems can be solved, and there is no doubt that the Zora and Base teams are working on it.

At the very least, creator tokens represent a completely new approach to monetizing creators. Even if it ultimately fails to become the optimal solution, it’s still worth a try.

本文源自網路： We may have misunderstood $JESSE; it’s generating revenue for the Base chain.Recommended Articles

Related: Matrixport 市場 Watch: Funding Structure Shifts During Crypto Market Correction

Macroeconomic disturbances and cooling risk appetite In late October, the US announced a 100% tariff on Chinese goods, triggering a rise in global risk aversion. Simultaneously, US Treasury yields rose, leading to a short-term withdrawal of funds from high-risk assets and suppressing the upward momentum of digital assets. The 加密貨幣 market’s sensitivity to liquidity changes became prominent again. Net inflows into stablecoins slowed since mid-October, indicating that institutional funds were on the sidelines, while retail trading activity cooled with price fluctuations. On-chain fund flows indicate a “structural adjustment”. On-chain metrics show that long-term holders (LTH) did not significantly reduce their holdings after the price fell below $110,000; instead, they showed slight signs of increasing their positions. Meanwhile, short-term traders (STH) concentrated their selling above $115,000, indicating that the market is…

#分析# 加密#交換#市場#代幣#工具© 版權聲明文章版权归作者所有，未经允许请勿转载。 上一篇 Predicting Market Evolution: The iPhone Era is Coming Again 下一篇 In-depth Market Forecast Report: Liquidity Paradigm, Industrial Leap, and the New Primitive Revolution 相關文章 新的Weekly Funding Roundup | 14 Projects Secured Funding, Total Raised $610 Million (2.9-2.22) 6086cf14eb90bc67ca4fc62b 3,542 1 From AI framework to x402, who will be “massively enriched” by the second wave of crypto AI? 6086cf14eb90bc67ca4fc62b 16,887 1 越來越強了，似乎是 NFT 在推高價格？ 6086cf14eb90bc67ca4fc62b 24,383 2 The IMF Didn’t Kill Bitcoin 6086cf14eb90bc67ca4fc62b 25,085 1 Data Revealed: How Much Money Can MEV Bot Make from CEX-DEX Arbitrage?Recommended Articles 6086cf14eb90bc67ca4fc62b 27,501 5 DeriW: The First Zero-Fee Contract ExchangeRecommended Articles 6086cf14eb90bc67ca4fc62b 21,044 暫無評論 您必須先登入才能發表評論！ 立即登入 暫無評論... 最新的文章 Blockchain etabliert sich als Schlüsseltechnologie in klassischen Branchen 11 小時前 515 Polymarket vs Kalshi: Who is the King of Prediction Markets? 20小時前 699 CRCL Surges 35%: Circle’s Q4 EPS Exceeds Expectations by 169%, AI + Stablecoin Moat Continues to Deepen 20小時前 554 Jane Street Halts “10 AM Dump,” BTC Stages Strong V-Shaped Rebound, Surging Toward $70K 20小時前 591 From Terra’s Collapse to the “10 AM Smash”: How Jane Street Played Both Continents’ Markets? 20小時前 510 熱門網站TempoGAIBLighter滑翔機普朗克雷爾斯BCPoker風箏 AI Bee.com 全球最大的 Web3 入口網站 合作夥伴 CoinCarp Binance CoinMarketCap CoinGecko 幣活 盔甲 下載Bee Network APP開啟您的Web3之旅 白皮書 角色 常問問題 © 2021-2026.版權所有。. 隱私政策 | 服務條款 下載蜜蜂網路APP 並開始 web3 之旅 全球最大的Web3入口網站 合作夥伴 CoinCarp Binance CoinMarketCap CoinGecko Coinlive Armors 白皮書 角色 常問問題 © 2021-2026.版權所有。. 隱私政策 | 服務條款 搜尋 搜尋站內鏈上社群媒體新聞 熱門推薦： 擼毛打金 數據分析 必關大神 教我避坑 繁體中文 English 简体中文 日本語 Tiếng Việt العربية 한국어 Bahasa Indonesia हिन्दी اردو Русский 繁體中文

智能索引记录