Some thoughts on leaving messages:

In my current Q&A sessions, I rarely answer questions about a specific token or project.

One of the main reasons is that most of these tokens and projects were questions that readers had asked before and I had answered them before, and there were no new highlights or progress in the subsequent development of these projects, so if readers flip through my previous articles, they can see the answers they had given me. My views on them at that time have not changed to this day.

In addition, I especially noticed that some readers began to have their own thoughts, and began to jump out of specific projects and tokens, and began to have their own ideas and observations on investment logic and investment ideas. If this change is caused by reading my articles, it is a great encouragement and motivation for me.

Because this is the ultimate purpose of my writing.

There are many articles online discussing the rise and fall of coin prices today, which project can be rushed tomorrow, and which coin XX is going to list the day after tomorrow.

It is true that these are topics that the vast majority of investors pay close attention to and are of great interest.

But I seldom write about these in my articles. One important reason is that I am not used to this kind of following the trend and fighting guerrilla warfare everywhere.

The way I prefer is to find a reliable investment framework, which can not only ensure safe and reliable profits from the "ballast stone", but also enable me to quickly find a suitable field and make great strides in it when a new blue ocean emerges.

And when such a blue ocean does not appear, let yourself relax completely and read and study with peace of mind, especially read classic books and learn from the experience of predecessors.

When this blue ocean gradually turns into a red ocean, I will pay less attention to it and lose interest in new projects emerging in the red ocean - because most of these so-called new projects do not seem innovative to me.

Continue with question answering below.

1. I am still curious about the valuation issue. The earnings of cryptocurrencies and company stocks are different. How should overvaluation and undervaluation be defined and estimated?

This is a question I have been exploring for a long time.

Recently, AAVE, which I believe has top-notch innovation capabilities in the DeFi ecosystem, has launched a series of reform measures, the most important of which, in my opinion, is to link token empowerment with project profitability.

I took this opportunity to calculate AAVE's financial status after the reform according to the traditional stock market's profit estimation methods (such as P/E, ROE and other indicators).

But the result of the calculation is terrible. If such a "company" is measured in the stock market, it is simply a junk stock. Now AAVE's "stock price" is a bubble in the bubble.

Therefore, at least for now, it may not work to use the traditional stock market method to measure crypto projects. But I firmly believe that at least for projects with a clear profit model, it is a general trend to move towards the evaluation standards of the traditional stock market. However, the specific standards used to measure the profitability of crypto projects may be quite different from those of the traditional stock market.

But this direction is becoming more and more obvious. We can’t say that tokens have no profit-making capabilities and can always maintain the current price of the currency only by relying on governance functions, right?

In addition, the situation described in Fisher's book that I read recently is very similar to the problems we face in the crypto ecosystem today.

For example, some of the stocks in emerging industries that he invested in in the 1950s would hardly stand the test if measured simply by the profit model we are familiar with today.

But why did he dare to invest in those stocks? What is his way of thinking and strategy? These are all worth learning and drawing lessons from for us today. I will find an opportunity to share them in the article after I finish reading his book in detail.

2. In the future, I am afraid that even if the Federal Reserve cuts interest rates, there may not be a bull market in the cryptocurrency market.

I don't think we need to worry too much about this. What's important is whether we have corresponding strategies to deal with these situations.

What if there is no bull market this time? I have written about this several times in my articles before. My approach is to continue holding on and wait for the next bull market.

In addition, I always believe that the real bull market in the cryptocurrency world will still come from application innovation within the ecosystem, rather than simply external liquidity.

The bull market in the U.S. stock market in recent years has been driven by the Federal Reserve's interest rate hikes.

Why is this possible?

The fundamental reason is that the innovation of artificial intelligence has brought a series of huge dividends. This strong internal driving force has greatly offset the pressure of the external financial environment.

So in my opinion, internal factors are far more important than external factors.

We will have an online discussion with you at 8pm on September 7th (Saturday).

Links for communication:
https://x.com/i/spaces/1LyxBgYwLaMKN