https://xitter.cf/t.co/qtK5QdQdcD
Joined June 2020
- Tweets3.5K
- Following942
- Followers491
- Likes10.4K
Pinned Tweet
Average cost $47k, currently $94k. Gonna hold this one $pwease dyor
CniPCE4b3s8gSUPhUiyMjXnytrEqUrMfSsnbBjLCpump
This quoted post is unavailable.
$PROLOGUE has seen a substantial dip (>40%) over the past 30 hours immediately following the $AERO announcement that it will expand to Robinhood Chain. I believe the market is significantly overestimating the threat to @fablesfi that @aeroxyz poses.
While @aeroxyz has an established brand and a competing ve(3,3) liquidity-incentive model, trading fee yield is objectively worse than @fablesfi. The attached image compares the 30-day trading fees generated by both protocols relative to DEX volume and TVL.
Relative to DEX volume, Fables’ yield was 0.181% compared to Aerodrome’s 0.135%. In other words, Fables generated 34% more fees per dollar of volume compared to Aerodrome over the last 30 days. Fables’ trading fees relative to TVL was 5.62% compared to Aerodrome’s 4.41%, showing Fable’s generated 27% more fees per dollar of TVL compared to Aerodrome.
I also believe the market is discounting the momentum that Fables has seen.
Current TVL of $50.8m increased 88% over the past 7 days, or 157% over the last 14 days, indicating increased momentum in the most recent week.
Trailing 7-day DEX volume of $671m increased 52% over the past week, or 115% compared to two weeks ago.
NO OTHER DEX IS SHOWING THIS LEVEL OF CONSISTENT GROWTH OVER A MULTI-WEEK PERIOD.
Lastly, using $AERO as a comp, $FABLES is being undervalued relative to TVL and 30-day trading fees.
Given that robinhood:0xb9972ca7188e511174947e3936a5315ac7073277 will account for approximately 1/3 of $FABLES circulating supply, we can establish an implied market cap of about $26.8m based on Prologue’s current $8.94m market cap (as of writing).
This implies a 0.53x premium to current TVL vs. Aerodrome’s 2.14x premium to current TVL.
More interestingly, Fable’s implied MC premium relative to its 30-day trading fees is 9.44x compared to Aerodrome’s 48.29x. This discrepancy becomes even more significant if we consider Fables’ consistent multi-week trading fee growth.
Fuck you higher RWA turbo flywheel tech
$NET
Take a look at this $NET treasury chart.
From inception to date, the treasury has grown at about a 14-15% compounded daily growth rate.
Note that every coin is backed by the on-chain RFV, and emissions decrease to $0 as NAV per coin approaches the price of $NET (currently NAV is $131 per $NET, meaning this is the absolute floor price). This creates an absolute floor price if the two converge.
The current FDV of $NET is ~$60m, so the question is, at what point does on-chain RFV reach $60m, where NAV per $NET equals the current price of $880.
If we apply the daily compounded growth rate of 14-15%, that’s about 15 DAYS. This means, if the treasury continues to grow at its current pace, the absolute floor price of $NET would reach its current price in 15 days.
If we want to be conservative and assume the treasury will not maintain this compounded daily growth rate, we can apply the recent $6.5m growth last week. Even applying a flat $6.5m RFV growth per week, total RFV would reach the current FDV around October 26-27 (a little bit longer if we look at on-chain RFV only). This doesn’t account for any future developments or added distribution channels that @NetNetCap has recently alluded to.
At the current price and 6.6x premium to NAV, the market is simply wrong.
Underwater beachball tech imminent.
Love all the $NET hype but haven’t seen anyone touch on an important aspect of this project.
The @NetNetCap dev, Al Dunlap, has an 8+ year track record of building in crypto, including a role as a core developer at Dapper Labs, where he helped build the first version of NBA Top Shot.
NBA Top Shot…
I’m not sure who remembers Top Shot in early 2021, but I had friends who never touched crypto before or since who were obsessed with it. The project raised $305m in private funding and went on to generate over $1B in volume, with a user base largely comprised of non-crypto normies.
It was one of the few projects in this space to reach escape velocity beyond crypto, and one of the few to generate meaningful revenue outside of traditional trading fees.
Our space is largely a circle jerk of the same liquidity flowing in and out of the same projects through increasingly accelerated cycles. It’s becoming clear that to reach a valuation >$1b today, a project needs to find a way to capture liquidity from outside of crypto.
Al Dunlap is one of the few developers with experience doing exactly that.
In his @MCGLive interview, he alluded to having distribution channels and partners ready to help push the project forward once he feels it’s ready. He’s also had ongoing communication with the Robinhood team, who have provided some level of consultation on the project and, according to Dunlap, directly told him that @NetNetCap is one of the only projects moving in the right direction regarding RWA innovation.
Right now, we’re still in the testing phase, with Dunlap fine-tuning the platform before bringing on additional partners and pushing it beyond our space.
I love the product so far, and with each new feature and game, I can see the platform becoming increasingly marketable to a non-crypto audience.
Given Dunlap’s experience at Dapper Labs, I’m confident he has the means to push this well beyond our little bubble when the time comes.
And that ultimately means something important for $NET holders: non-crypto liquidity flowing through the treasury and back to $NET holders (see staking and treasury mechanics).
I am not cash cat. I am not a technical analyst nor am I a KOL. I do not have alpha and I do not provide well thought out theses on memecoins for OTC supply.
I am dumb money
