Let's talk about the story of the 1800 BTC from the past two days.

Haha 😁. Does anyone have good thoughts on this??

It answered a core question: with 1800 Bitcoins already, why still chase after airdrop money?

The answer: this BTC does not belong to her personally, but was pooled by a group of large holders. Originally, they wanted to take this opportunity to make a big profit, but as a result of the fake TVL, the distribution of extra benefits was reduced. Now it seems very difficult to explain this to the large holders, so they began to 'defend their rights', while the published statements were full of 'misleading' information.

What is 'fake TVL'?

The 'fake TVL' in this event actually stems from the operational legacy issues of Merlin back in the day. At that time, in order to quickly raise the TVL, Merlin recruited a group of large holders. These individuals did not actually need to deposit funds into Merlin, but instead locked their money in a custodial account (these funds were still on the Bitcoin mainnet), and then generated corresponding mBTC on the Merlin platform to participate in the ecosystem and earn points.

Later, when Solv was just starting out, it belonged to the Merlin ecosystem. In order to cold start, a considerable amount of 'fake TVL' flowed into the protocol. However, as development progressed, Solv later cut ties with Merlin and completely isolated this kind of fund operation. Since then, all TVL has been genuine (for example, on BSC and Arbitrum, it is no longer possible to fabricate TVL in this way). However, this time when listing on Binance, the profit distribution mechanism inevitably underwent some adjustments.

Ultimately, Solv chose to sacrifice the interests of large holders with 'fake TVL', allocating more airdrops to retail users who genuinely participated in staking. However, this operation evidently left some large holders whose interests were harmed dissatisfied, pulling along the retail users who benefited from it to 'defend their rights', which is quite baffling. In fact, there is no perfect solution for this kind of profit distribution; ultimately, it can only sacrifice the interests of certain groups. And from the results, the users who staked real money are the final 'beneficiaries'.