of tokens? Bullish on the team or unnecessary tokenization?
I don't know enough to have an opinion on that one. I imagine creation of more tokens is something to avoid unless you can only push out whatever utility you're trying to add with said new token
I think just alleviating the old narrative with a new narrative, making the old narrative seem less dated, and marketing wise they are successful
Unnecessary tokenization 👍
Difficult question for sure especially bc who knows what is happening behind closed doors at blur. Without any inside info here is my objective thought: When launching a product/feature, it is easier to launch it and then learn from feedback and enhance. If an app such as blur launches a chain with a token, the token becomes part of the chain narrative and they can’t walk that back so, future decisions for the chain should have the token in mind. If blast didn’t launch with a token, blur could have learned from the market response and launched a token later if there was a strong business case to do that.
Right. I suppose I was more asking in terms of under what situation would tokenizing $BLAST be good for $BLUR holders compared to if they kept it one token? Is there such a scenario? Or is it zero sum.
These are just different projects with the same founder and the same investor, and there is no strong correlation. As for whether there is a subsequent correlation, I do not know, but there is a high probability. But it's still a lot to expect, especially from people who have made a lot of money with blur in the past. nft players, L2 is a new thing for them。They're not in the same situation as us in that blur's user base is nft while blast has a much broader user base.
Could Blast be a success without its own token? I think no
Well the counterpoint is if $BLUR was its token. Would that mean it wouldn't be a success? I don't know. I assume some people in this community have different opinions.
They were incentivizing TVL through a $Blast airdrop. If it was through a $Blur airdrop instead, it would be viewed as dilution. Plus, $Blur already had an established value, this way people can speculate on $Blast value and its infinite potential
That's an interesting way to describe it. I wonder if everyone else sees it that way too.
Обсуждают сегодня