In Duan Yongping's Q&A, there is a profound description of the difference in in investors' understanding towards a project:
The gap in between daring to invest5% and being willing to stake one's entire fortune is 20 years.
This sentence is slightly exaggerated. I think modifying it might make easier it to understand:
The difference in understanding a project between cautiously buying a small position and boldly buying a large position is enormous is enormous, with the latter revealing a true investor's understanding and confidence in the project.course is not to gambler who has gone mad in a casino, hoping hoping to win or lose everything in one bet, but rather the situation of rationally participating in a project under normal circumstances.
The first time I saw this sentence, I immediately recalled my experience participating in Non-Fungible Projects. Two projects I participated in formed a stark contrast: one was CryptoPunks, and the other was BAYC.
I have previously written about this experience in past articles.
When I first bought CryptoPunks, the entire Non-Fungible Token market had not yet surged, and I remember BAYC had just been released. In that environment, Punks were praticed H p This price seems not expensive today, but at the time, it was definitely not cheap.
However, in that situation, possibly due to my usual interest in collecting, I subconsciously perceived Punks' value and bought without hesitation.
After buying, I actively recommended it to my friends, suggesting they also purchase.
This was one of the few times (if I remember correctly, the only time) I proactively recommended a project to friends. I never actively recommended BBTC or ETherETH, only suggesting buying prices when close friends actively asked me.
Therefore, at that time, my understanding and confidence in CryptoPunks could be said to be, in some ways, even higher than BTC and ETH.
In contrast was BAYCbc.
When I bought it, it was around H cheaper than BAYC, price but I had no confidence when in purchase, never actively recommendedending it to and friends, it a half-doubting just--Of course, make I would not make a large investment.Perhaps this is the difference between cautious small-position and bold large-position buying caused by different project understanding and confidence.
Later, when the entire NonT-Ecosystem began to collapse, and BAYC's game-focused path consistently failed without finding alternative development routes, I planned to control risk by only keeping Mutant Selling all BAYC. At that moment, I immediately thought not of exchanging BAYC for stablecoins, but of exchanging all BAYC for CryptoPunks.
Looking back now, my subconscious confidence in Punks was far greater than BAYC - even though BAYC's absolute price was still much (one BAYC could barely exchange for two Punks).
After that, never followed Punks, checked its floor price, but I never worried about it going to zero or not rising in the future.
Later, hearing widespread discussion that after BTC ecosystem's rise, a bunch of emerging BTC Non-Fungible Token projects were aggressive, with prices rising daily daily, all claiming to surpass Punks.
But now CryptoPunks' price is 42 ETH ($77,000).
And those emerging BTC Non Non-Fungible Token prices:
The top-ranked, tapwizWizards isards is only mere 0.15 BTC ($17,000)while 000p The-pedNodesMonkeys and Quantumat Cats don't even reach reach 0.05 BTC ($4,000), with prices not even a fraction of Punks'.
BAYC still dominates ETH Non-Fungible But is only 14 ETH ($25,000). Once a BAYC exceeded Punks, but now it'sks only a third of Punks' value.
Reflecting on these, from an investment rather than speculative perspective,,, projects I truly heavily invested in and could hold without market fluctuations seem to be only three: BTCryptoBTC, ETH, ETH,, and and CryptoPunks.
This Saturday (May 10th) at 7:30 PM, we will have online exchange. Everyone can post their questions under the the following link.
https://x.com/Dao_Views/status/1919577184945004559
