Author: Lao Bai
With the imminent launch of Plasma FDN, there's a constant stream of debate about its pros and cons, supporters and bears. The market's primary concern is: Is the public stablecoin blockchain a promising platform? Can it truly disrupt Tron?
Compared with Tron (@trondao), Plasma has two obvious advantages:
Faster and cheaper : USDT transfers are free, which forced Tron to recently "cut prices" by 60%, but there are still fees after all, and it cannot be zero.
EVM compatibility : This makes it easier for blue-chip DeFi projects like AAVE and Curve to migrate. In the DeFi ecosystem on Tron, only JustLend has a TVL worthy of attention.
As for the underlying technical architecture of consensus, the author believes this is unimportant. Although Plasma is a Bitcoin sidechain, its security primarily relies on its own PoS mechanism and has little to do with Bitcoin. It can also be considered a Merlin chain.
Of course, Plasma’s disadvantages are equally obvious:
Size gap : Although the USDT TVL on Tron has dropped from a high of $83 billion to $76 billion, it is still an order of magnitude higher than Plasma and currently maintains a crushing lead.
Use Cases : USDT is, at its core, or so it seems, a product of regulatory evasion. It's a bit like an on-chain "Eurodollar" (a concept I learned from @joyliumacro's video). Therefore, most USDT holders primarily use it for two purposes: 1. Trading and transferring USDT on centralized exchanges; 2. Using USDT as a store of value (SOV), effectively holding USD and making deposits and withdrawals as needed. Therefore, on-chain payments are not the primary use case for USDT.
Regarding both of these points, Tron's years of deep integration have built a substantial moat. Sun Ge's (@justinsuntron) work has not been in vain. Regarding on-chain payments, the author believes that the @tempo channel he previously developed appears to have a significant advantage.
Next, we can also talk about the bullish (Shill) and bearish (Fud) views.
optimistic
Team Strength and Resources : I've personally communicated with Plasma's founders and several ecosystem projects and feel the team is very reliable. The main reason I didn't invest last year was a lack of clarity about the future trends in stablecoin chains and a perceived overvaluation of prices in 2024. However, Plasma's partnerships with Binance, AAVE, and others demonstrate its exceptionally strong resources. Not every chain launches with a $3-4 billion TVL, and after Binance launches pre-market contracts, its market capitalization remains stable at $6-7 billion.
Bearish
Team Linkage Risk : Rumors have surfaced today claiming a significant overlap between the Plasma and Blast teams. The authenticity of this rumor is currently unverifiable, as the author has only spoken with the founders themselves. Assuming it's true, whether this is a positive or negative development is a matter of opinion. Blast was also a popular project back in the day, demonstrating that the team has ideas and a drive to innovate. However, the downside is that they may simply chase hype, digging holes without filling them, and abandoning them once the hype has faded. The author can only say that, based on feedback from ecosystem projects, Plasma appears to be committed to long-term development and sustained growth, and is unlikely to suffer the same fate as Blast.
So, Tron vs. Plasma, established players vs. emerging forces, who do you think will win?
