In the crypto, the word endorsement is worth thousands of gold.

Whether engaged in investment research or planning projects, players once had a tacit understanding:

Projects endorsed by big VCs often mean big opportunities.

Due to the extreme information asymmetry in the industry, big VCs are regarded as "information filters" to some extent. That is, professional people use professional knowledge, huge funds and valuable reputation endorsement to select a project, and then follow He and I will most likely be able to eat meat.

For example, Paradigm, a top VC in the encryption industry, has invested in Coinbase, Maker, Uniswap and the popular FTX, and has an extremely sharp vision in selecting projects.

During the last bull market cycle, the saying "Pardigm led the investment without small profits" was widely circulated.

But recently, staying away from Paradigm seems to have become a new tacit understanding among the leeks.

When you open social media, you can always hear a voice getting stronger and stronger, that is, all projects invested by Paradigm will not be touched;

Some people even joked that Paradigm's office is in Shenzhen, and the projects it invests in are quite similar to Shenzhen's capital markets in terms of behavior. This VC itself has gradually become good at making markets, but bad at doing things...

From the top VC who serves as a weather vane to the "Plate Master" that everyone avoids, how did Paradigm fall from the altar step by step in the hearts of Liake?

From Paradigm to "Puadigm"

The initial turn of emotions has to start with FriendTech.

FriendTech (hereinafter referred to as FT) set off a social craze last year. The promotion of KOLs in FT and the economic design of buying shares certainly contributed to the promotion, but what really triggered the further influx of users was Paradigm’s investment in FT’s seed round. information.

With the subconscious mind that big VC investment will definitely lead the way, after the news was announced, FT's user activity and handling fees have obviously increased significantly for a period of time.

But everyone knows that it is false to go for social networking, but it is true to go for airdrops.

Everyone later learned about the points model adopted by FT. The more active you are, the more shares you purchase, the more points you will get, and the ranking will be higher. The points will be converted into token airdrops at some point in the future.

But this future, even now that SocialFi is cold, has not yet arrived.

Hot spots in the encryption market change frequently, and social products are even more obvious. Then the activity dropped sharply and TVL gradually withdrew. Even if you insist on being active in FT, it will be difficult to find someone to talk to you.

And the leeks who have just woken up from their dreams began to realize that isn't this a bit like PUA?

Encourage you to continue to invest, continue to control you, and have a BTC that cannot be cashed in for a long time.

Until this feeling once again possessed Blast, which Paradigm invested in.

The first L2 with its own income, the more TVL you contribute for a longer period of time, the more points you will get, and the future BTC will be more delicious... Familiar formula and taste.

Although Paradigm's head of research has expressed disapproval of some of Blast's execution strategies, Pacman also publicly stated that Paradigm has no control over Blast's GTM (Go-To-Market) listing strategy;

But with the same VC and the same PUA flavor, it is difficult not to let Paradigm get involved. Players have gradually developed an impression that Paradigm is very good at PUA.

Not to mention Blast’s further PUA points strategy after the mainnet was launched, which made the early participants who had deposited a lot of ETH even more difficult to do, and their indignation and anger reached the extreme for a while:

It is no longer important whether Paradigm actually participates in the design and cooperates with the project to absorb TVL; what is important is that the PUA experience that the invested projects have repeatedly brought to the Leeks has strengthened this awareness of rights protection:

Paradigm, has become "PUAdigim". In the past, you felt that if you had it, you would be able to shave off your hair, but now you feel that if you have it, you will definitely get no good results.

It only happened three times, but a similar thing happened to Aevo these days, where the greater the expectations, the greater the disappointment. The ambiguity about wash trading has seriously damaged the vitality of those hair-raising parties who are rushing to invest in Paradigm projects.

Note that we are still unable to determine whether Paradigm has reached a tacit understanding of PUA with the project party; but it is an indisputable fact that the longer the delay, the less clear the rules, the higher the opportunity cost, and the greater the uncertainty we face.

What puts Leeks in a dilemma even more is that Paradigm’s golden brand name is still there, and the useless effect is obvious:

If you don't do it, others will.

If you don't work because you are troubled by PUA, then there will definitely be a bunch of competitors who are happy, and there will be one less competitive pressure. After all, in the crypto market, there is no shortage of people who work hard to get a free lunch. What’s more, if people know that you don’t eat, their cake will be bigger.

The food is tasteless, and I am afraid that others will be full.

Between the benefits and the possibility of no benefits, it becomes understandable for the leeks who have been tortured repeatedly to focus on Paradigm.

Long-termism, bitter leeks

However, the poor reputation does not completely mean that Paradigm is useless.

Paradigm was founded in 2018. Its initial investors include the endowments of Yale University, Harvard University and Stanford University. Academics and researchers are not fools and will not give money to organizations without investment capabilities.

The first US$400 million fund launched by Paradigm came from a donation from Yale, which also invested in DeFi cornerstones such as Uniswap and infrastructure kings such as StarkWare.

Don't forget that the word Paradigm itself means "paradigm". In terms of business model selection, Paradigm’s portfolio includes many creative projects with new paradigms.

Friend Tech is like this, Blast is like this, and Aevo is like this. They are all projects that are different from what is currently on the market.

When top VCs tend to find projects that cause paradigm shifts, it must mean that the project is somewhat real and has the potential to change a certain operating model or business format;

However, it may take a long time to realize the potential.

The leeks have grown up complaining about PUA, earning points, double speed acceleration, invitations and other gameplay methods, and feel disgusted.

If you focus on the long-term construction of the project, there will inevitably be a long-term marketing strategy to catch big fish. The above-mentioned gameplay is just a part of the strategy, and it is natural and reasonable from the perspective of VC and project incubation;

But leeks also hate the word long-termism the most.

In the crypto-interest field, no one will continue to grow up with a project for no reason. Without the phased benefits, all companionship is vain.

Moderate PUA is feasible, but continuous PUA is shameful. This is the real consensus among leeks.

Because I can't eat meat, it's not a good person?

Finally, what we need to be clear about is:

Paradigm may be the ceiling for the crypto investment community, but it may not be the ceiling for your personal investment.

The goal of VC is not and will not be to ensure the success of your personal investment; sometimes there is a conflict that is not easy to reconcile between investing in a good project and how much income you can get from it, such as the PUA you are experiencing.

VC is meant to be venture capital. How can you guarantee that you will succeed if you follow it?

Once the project is completed, you may not be able to eat the meat. But it might be unfair to conclude that a certain VC is garbage just because you can’t eat meat.

Today, Paradigm is the target of PUA's emotional venting. Which VC will be hated tomorrow? Criticize all the crypto VCs and stay away from all PUA projects, and your income will still not be one cent higher.

You might as well think about inscriptions and fair launches, and VCs don't get any meat; characters in different ecological niches in the crypto world have their own ways of obtaining profits.

As some KOLs say, give up worship, question authority, and think independently.

Not being led around by the nose and finding out your own way of eating meat is the beginning of the disenchantment of walking in the crypto world.