Binance Square
LIVE
LIVE
SJ Crypto
--13k views
See original
📍Why did the market give a 1 billion valuation in advance when $NOT was initially launched? 丨Comparative valuation method of leading Meme The leading Meme will have a market value of about 3% of the infrastructure FDV. I have listed this data, all calculated based on FDV The market can initially estimate 1 billion before NOT goes online, based on this judgment basis (FDV) However, I think there is a prerequisite for this 3%: the market activity of the chain is sufficient That is to say, the liquidity of the chain market needs to be sufficient. I have noticed that some research reports have used this valuation comparison method to conduct some Meme market research on unpopular chains and calculate the corresponding valuation, but I think it is of little reference value Because many chains are currently playing by themselves, there is no user or liquidity retention for a long time, so this 3% leading Meme is more like an indicator of whether the chain is active based on the current results and the ceiling of the Meme market Whether the Meme activity is active can almost be used as an indicator to judge the user activity of a chain. See BNB in ​​the chart below Chain's leading Meme market capitalization share is still a little bit lower 📍But currently, for several relatively active chains (ETH/BNB/SOL/TON), the average leading Meme market capitalization share is basically 3% In addition to the above phenomena, I also have a few personal thoughts in this short article👇🏻(1) If the fundamentals of these Layer1 remain unchanged in the future, that is, there is no large-scale migration of liquidity stock, then this chain-based 3% indicator can be used as the valuation level of the leading Meme (2) If there are new popular chains launched in the future, and The Meme market of this chain has not yet emerged. 3% can be used as the valuation ceiling for the leading Meme, and the FDV market value of the chain can be used to gradually push it. (3) The valuation ceiling of the Meme market should react to the FDV market value of the infrastructure. (4) Market attention and FDV are the basic conditions. The corresponding Meme should also be calculated by FDV. Memes with various token designs that lead to unfair distribution should be considered for exclusion. Bottom-up should be considered first. Figure 2: The valuation issue discussed with a few friends 5 minutes before NOT went online yesterday was based on the above logic.

📍Why did the market give a 1 billion valuation in advance when $NOT was initially launched? 丨Comparative valuation method of leading Meme

The leading Meme will have a market value of about 3% of the infrastructure FDV. I have listed this data, all calculated based on FDV

The market can initially estimate 1 billion before NOT goes online, based on this judgment basis (FDV)

However, I think there is a prerequisite for this 3%: the market activity of the chain is sufficient

That is to say, the liquidity of the chain market needs to be sufficient. I have noticed that some research reports have used this valuation comparison method to conduct some Meme market research on unpopular chains and calculate the corresponding valuation, but I think it is of little reference value

Because many chains are currently playing by themselves, there is no user or liquidity retention for a long time, so this 3% leading Meme is more like an indicator of whether the chain is active based on the current results and the ceiling of the Meme market

Whether the Meme activity is active can almost be used as an indicator to judge the user activity of a chain. See BNB in ​​the chart below Chain's leading Meme market capitalization share is still a little bit lower

📍But currently, for several relatively active chains (ETH/BNB/SOL/TON), the average leading Meme market capitalization share is basically 3%

In addition to the above phenomena, I also have a few personal thoughts in this short article👇🏻(1) If the fundamentals of these Layer1 remain unchanged in the future, that is, there is no large-scale migration of liquidity stock, then this chain-based 3% indicator can be used as the valuation level of the leading Meme

(2) If there are new popular chains launched in the future, and The Meme market of this chain has not yet emerged. 3% can be used as the valuation ceiling for the leading Meme, and the FDV market value of the chain can be used to gradually push it.

(3) The valuation ceiling of the Meme market should react to the FDV market value of the infrastructure.

(4) Market attention and FDV are the basic conditions. The corresponding Meme should also be calculated by FDV. Memes with various token designs that lead to unfair distribution should be considered for exclusion. Bottom-up should be considered first.

Figure 2: The valuation issue discussed with a few friends 5 minutes before NOT went online yesterday was based on the above logic.

LIVE
SJ Crypto
--
A brief talk about NOT: A bottom-up experiment of TON ecosystem? | #Binance New Coin No. 54 #NOT

1. Let’s define NOT first. The Meme attribute is definitely greater than the game attribute, and there is not even any shadow of the game. Strictly speaking, it can be defined as the track of [mobile mining]

The user volume of this track is really huge. The famous project that has not been launched in this track is PINetwork, and the most famous in the secondary market is CORE

2. The exchange listing NOT is actually understandable, but this time it is a bit surprising that OKX, which is also listed on Binance, is mining new coins. I remember that the last one like this seemed to be ACE

Because the former may want user traffic. After all, it is said that the number of users backed by TG is also huge, and it is normal for the exchange to eat this traffic. This is a passive perspective, but there is initiative in the new coin mining

3. Based on the second point, I said before that it may be that the seal of TON has loosened. Previously, TON had regulatory issues. This may have led to Binance not launching it, and TON is the only one in the top 20 that has not been launched.
(Background supplement: TON became the target of SEC litigation in 2020)

But since last year, we can see that TON has been very active in the industry. It is speculated that it has escaped the previous regulatory shadow. I have not found any public information on whether there are any specific SEC-related events.

4. NOT and the logo are TON in reverse. Therefore, although I said in the first point that it can be defined as the [mobile mining] track, it still has the strongest Meme attribute. After all, if there is a serious business project, it will not have such a Meme-oriented tone.

5. NOT is fully circulated when it is launched, and nearly 80% of it belongs to the community. This selling pressure is unimaginable. In addition, the initial launch is used for new coin mining. The proportion is only 3%, which is far lower than the proportion of any previous period compared with the full circulation.

We calculate the market value in circulation. The previous #Binance Launchpool basically circulates about 10%, so the proportion of new coin mining in it can have a certain influence

In the current situation, the proportion of new coin mining has almost no influence

6. In addition to the recent launch of new coins, I have listed several in the figure below. Except for ETHFI and ENA, two tokens with relatively strong Defi attributes and business models, the other two tokens of SAGA and OMNI infrastructure business have performed very averagely

This has a lot to do with market liquidity. For this reason, I also listed the representative MEME listed on Binance: BOME, which also performed poorly.

As expected, the leading Meme of TON series was launched in this issue.

7. So for us, where is the market opportunity to gamble❓

This opportunity undoubtedly refers to the re-gambling of new coins on Binance.

Let’s talk about the secondary market first: NOT Considering the above factors, it is undoubtedly too risky to take it up at the initial launch. It is very cost-effective to ambush TON in the short term, because it is very likely to be listed on Binance after this wave

Then in the primary market, it is of course no problem to target the TON ecosystem, but I have seen many projects that are doing similar models to NOT. Such projects are unlikely to continue to be listed on Binance. Finding projects in different sectors to interact can also gain some certainty

8. Why do I say that NOT is also bottom-up❓

Because it is based on a large number of gathering communities, this part of the community is of very low quality, and even has a lower threshold than the fair MINT of the original inscription

This way of logging into the secondary market, everyone has no community consensus on the token at all, and taking the money for safety may be the mainstream idea of ​​the current so-called community

The launch of NOT is indeed very unexpected. It has been less than two quarters since the project was launched and logged into the secondary market, and the majority of the shares have been given to the community

Without going through the wash, it is hard to imagine that the market has so much liquidity to squander in the short term. Bottom-up construction cannot be separated from this step
Disclaimer: Includes thrid-party opinions. No financial advice. May include sponsored content. See T&Cs.
0
Replies 7
Quote 2
Explore the lastest crypto news
⚡️ Be a part of the latests discussions in crypto
💬 Interact with your favorite creators
👍 Enjoy content that interests you
Email / Phone number
Relevant Creator
LIVE
@SJCrypto

Explore More From Creator

$ALT 各级别周期分析(日K、4小时K、1小时K),不同级别的观点对应的是不同交易风格偏好的Trader,但有个基本原则:小周期服从大周期 也就是说,大周期如果有方向性观点,则小周期以大周期为基准 我们从大到小展开,首先日K线周期看ALT已经跌破了之前0.3的上线支撑,这个位置跌破之后,下面的目标价位我只能用斐波纳契去回测了,第一目标支撑是在0.24左右,这是在保持持续下跌所能探到的第一目标支撑,也是可作为左侧空止盈的目标位置 目前日K的下跌趋势有所减缓,我们看到趋势线下来的倾斜度是在不断放平的,另外MACD等线型指标走的有点差,不够丝滑参考价值不大 再来到4小时看是否有机会,4小时和1小时现价都是处于支撑位置的,这个支撑位置是这几天才出来的,判定当前4小时支撑有效的话,我认为可以左侧进多(但进场点位还是要至少在30分钟周期找更精准) 阻力位置是0.32,也就是下图中黄线的位置,这个阻力位可作为止盈点,盈亏比还是非常不错的,因为刚好在支撑,止损直接放支撑下面就行 结合1小时的周期看,多单的确定性就更高了,因为在指标上,MACD在走了一段的粘合之后,初步出来了向上交叉的多头初段形态,第一止盈位置可以参考4小时的0.32,保守的话就是0.3 但如果你奔着0.3去的,我不建议你做,因为盈亏比一般,趋近于一比一的 再聊聊基本面, #ALT再质押生态 这个可能广场很多人都介绍了,其实核心就是笼络生态框架下的各个项目,给ALT的持有者发福利,现在的ALT再质押已经出了类似于交易所Launchpool的功能,就是通过质押和再质押$ALT 来参与挖矿 目前在质押界面有两期项目排着了,可以说是市场明牌的空投,继续格局现货的可以搞搞,教程我之前有发,我首页搜一下就行
--
Web3是如何变成现在这样低流通高FDV的市场格局的❓丨本文素材与部分数据源于#BinanceResearch 的研报 本文是基于当前的现象附上了一部分数据做观点延伸,不是对版翻译,更多的是基于该篇研报的观点延伸~ 首先,上线将流通控制在10%左右,FDV动辄几十亿,这是近段热议的所谓“VC项目”的显著特点 在这一基础上,引发了行业对目前市场存量流动性是否可以承接住这么高市值的讨论 更长远看,也是对未来代币释放到市场中价值析出的恐惧:我目前买入,未来解锁是不是会大概率冲击币价? 目前的数据表明(图1),初始的流通市值占比平均在12.3%左右,这是在过去3年时间里最低的水平,而FDV却与去年全年已经近乎持平 援引原报告观点:“为了让这些代币在未来几年内维持当前市场价格,大约需要800亿的增量资金流入这些代币才能够匹配待释放的份额。尽管市场周期一直在发生变化,但这可能不是一件容易的事。” 同时,报告中还特别列出了15个颇具代表性的项目(图2),它们大多都在一线交易所中完成了上市 这项数据是否具有决定性意义?我认为是没有的,但这项数据的确反映了目前投资机构与项目团队之间在此前项目的发展阶段中达成的一种群体性共识 甚至于一些项目的背后有同一个机构,它们在过去2-3年里的风险偏好趋同,以致于这种初期少额流通的共识在一级市场广泛传播 再加上交易所方面可能对项目及机构的要求,我印象当中 #Binance 曾表示会要求LaunchPool项目背后的投资机构至少锁仓一年以此来保护投资者早期的利益 事实也证明,在过去每一期的Launchpool项目当中,凡是有机构参与其中的,基本都会有针对机构的一年死期代币锁定机制 这个动机是否是倾向好的,我认为是偏乐观的,客观来说如果在上线阶段机构就参与了市场流通,那么机构的批量退出可能会造成比目前还要夸张的市场效应 因此低流通高FDV的格局下,也进一步引发了市场对 #MEME 代币的关注,从BASE到Solana再到TON,可以说都是流动性与Meme之间的注意力迁移 大多数 meme 币的所有代币都在 TGE 阶段100流通,这消除了未来稀释带来的抛售压力。这表明持有者不会因代币释放而遭受持有价值的进一步稀释 这种结构被初步归因为本轮市场对Meme的吸引力主要根源之一,特别是随着市场对"VC代币"解锁事件影响的认识不断增强(但其实解锁并不完全等于市场价格一定遭受影响,甚至也不等于解锁就卖出) 一个有趣的数据(图3),在上方图表中的末端显示L1在今年的表现并没有多么出彩,但是在过去几轮的牛市背景下,新兴L1的崛起都是市场的主旋律之一,因此目前基于这个结果有两个推断: (1)市场的流动性被过度稀释,牛市预期提前被各种“伪”应用叙事透支 (2)真正的牛市行情远未到来,当前也许牛市行至过半,但真正的高潮还需要一些条件 这又回到了本篇的主要议题:高FDV。这种高FDV的现象,是在一级市场就固定好了的 一方面是VC逐渐的占据了上游市场的主导地位,尽管资本净流入加密领域的规模一直在稳步上升。自 2017 年以来,加密项目的风投资金总额已超过910亿 美元 尤其是在上一轮周期当中,二级市场的过于乐观的积极情绪,以致于在那段期间里面不光催生了许多的投资机构,还给一级市场带去了更积极的融资环境 我们可以注意到下图(图4)中21年1季度-22年3季度期间,积累了几乎整个加密行业发展阶段的一级资金涌入的大头 同时可能也是这种积极的融资环境,让该时期项目的融资阶段估值水平处于较高的水平线当中,以致于上一轮被融资的项目,这一轮登录二级市场出现了比较巨量的FDV 这还是在多数项目没有长期盈利模型,仅仅只是一些对“叙事正确”切入的背景下完成的 以致于一级的估值都是基于一些对盈利业务没有帮助的数据环境下达成了 因此此前中文市场有KOL曾指出当前的所谓“价值币”实际上和Meme市场的零和博弈没什么区别,因为它们二者基本都是没有协议的盈利业务的 在本文最后,我还想补充一些有关FDV的观点:诚然FDV提供了一般意义上的规模统计,但我认为其本身的意义并不大 在市场新币上线的早期阶段,为什么我时常会将代币的释放曲线作为一个重要的参考因素,其核心原因就是在于加密市场的周期性存在着一个普遍规律:4年一牛熊 基于这项原则,目前我们可以肯定的是早在去年底就已经进入了新的市场周期,那接下来两年内要走完的牛周期基本是历史规律下必然的轨迹,那么在本轮周期中去过度焦虑实际至少要3年以上才会全流通FDV是否有益于我们的投资回报呢?
--

Latest News

View More
Sitemap
Cookie Preferences
Platform T&Cs