celestia's chart is down bad because they've been selling a future that hasn't arrived yet
when a project launches a token, the market prices the story it's telling against the traction it's showing
the bigger the story, the quicker it must make "progress" (explains a lot of logo x logo bd fuckery). a wider gap makes narrative decay faster
celestia's story runs ahead of its traction despite having real customers and usage, and so the market punishes it for not making quicker progress
hyperliquid (using for contrast), also has a big vision, but has previously underpromised and overdelivered, which keeps its narrative healthy even without major short-term progress
every project lives somewhere on this graph, but the moment a project has thousands of token holders, the expected pace of progress becomes priced
selling a big story without the traction to support it is not a bad thing. it's how every startup begins. many projects have launched a token with little traction, and then either closed the gap quickly enough or recovered after the narrative bled out
but launching a token with a big gap is essentially taking out a loan against future execution. the interest owed compounds, and if it's not paid, the chart ends up telling the story instead
when a project launches a token, the market prices the story it's telling against the traction it's showing
the bigger the story, the quicker it must make "progress" (explains a lot of logo x logo bd fuckery). a wider gap makes narrative decay faster
celestia's story runs ahead of its traction despite having real customers and usage, and so the market punishes it for not making quicker progress
hyperliquid (using for contrast), also has a big vision, but has previously underpromised and overdelivered, which keeps its narrative healthy even without major short-term progress
every project lives somewhere on this graph, but the moment a project has thousands of token holders, the expected pace of progress becomes priced
selling a big story without the traction to support it is not a bad thing. it's how every startup begins. many projects have launched a token with little traction, and then either closed the gap quickly enough or recovered after the narrative bled out
but launching a token with a big gap is essentially taking out a loan against future execution. the interest owed compounds, and if it's not paid, the chart ends up telling the story instead
btw if you want to plot pure memecoins on this graph they just sit at (0,0) bc they're not promising anything and so no progress expectations. they live on a completely different dimension that is just as if not more interesting than debating infra slop lol
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
