Note: This article comes from @NintendoDoomed Twitter, and is compiled by Mars Finance as follows:
Aerdrome price has gone through a round, and Base has supported the peak 1B Mcap, 2B FDV 100 times, showing its muscle. The positive externalities it brought also further revitalized the Base ecosystem.
On the other hand, BSC has not made any progress even after the launch of the new product. Where is the gap? This thread will take this as a starting point to discuss and comment on the differences between the two CEXs on the chain.
The reason why Coinbase launched Aero is very simple. As shown in the figure below, in the past, projects incentivized DeFi miners with direct incentives. For example, for a project token worth $2, a miner might get an additional $1 from the DEX transaction fee, for a total of $3.
In the Ve(3,3) DEX system like Aero, this $3 is used to bribe veAero, and veAERO votes to allocate $Aero tokens (with a higher value, such as $9) to miners.
In the end, the project owner still paid $3, veAero (Aero lock-up) received $3 in real yield, and the miners received $9 in incentives, which doubled the incentives.
The higher the price of Aero, the higher the incentive value issued, the higher the incentive that Base ecological projects can enjoy, and the fundamentals of ecological projects will also be strengthened. The value of bribe tokens that can be used to give Aero will also be higher, and Aero’s income will also be higher, and the price will be more optimistic about forming a flywheel.
In addition, if Base directly incentivizes on-chain projects, on the one hand, it is easy to become off-chain relationship building, and on the other hand, it is not easy to publicly incentivize those on-chain meme and meme projects. These projects have traffic. By supporting Aero, it is to achieve permissionless incentives for the on-chain ecosystem, because any project can further amplify the incentive effect through Aero. This approach brings benefits to ordinary developers that cannot be compared with official incentives.
Looking back at BSC, are there any similar products? Not only that, but they are also a level better than Base in terms of developers and products.
Thena is an enhanced version of Aerodrome, supporting V3 centralized liquidity
Pancake + Cakepie dual-wheel drive can exert a stronger flywheel effect and a higher ceiling
Although we complained that the Cake War organization was far inferior to the Pendle War (suspected of boasting), the subsequent iteration of Pancake was also relatively slow, which delayed the completion of the flywheel. In addition, we did not learn from the advanced ve(3,3) transaction fees to the voters, but instead took a small part of the voting rights in the hands of the team for manual intervention (the taste of power, who is willing to let go)
However, in horizontal comparison, although it is not as good as the best, it is more than enough compared to the worst. For example, Camelot, the leader of ARB, has been calling for voting gauge and voting incentives for a year but still has not been put on the voting gauge.
The Cakepie/Magpie team is very rare in BSC, and their subDAOs are also very successful on other chains. Although Thena has not yet proven itself on other chains, its products are faster and better than those of Velo/Aero.
Since BSC has better product and developer foundation, why didn’t it achieve similar results as Base? Even Mantle’s ve(3,3) DEX Moe was able to make some splashes this round, but BSC couldn’t?
As long as you do a little research, you will be surprised to find that Binance's support for this is not zero but negative... negative...
Yes, on the one hand, the above projects did not receive the investment and listing support from Aero, on the other hand, as shown in the figure, the address marked as Binance and another suspected Binance address (inferred by the Cake community) have locked up 26% of veCAKE in total, directly competing with ecological projects. After all, the dividends and incentives in each round are limited. If Binance gets more, the ecological projects will get less.
The Pancake team gets a small half of the voting rights, and Binance gets another small half of the rest, which greatly reduces the effect. Usually, this is injected into ecological projects for support. Here, they neither support the ecology nor directly steal money from the ecology. Binance should not lack this Pancake income dividend...
Is ve(3,3) difficult to understand? However, in the last round, whether it was the Curve War between Yearn founded by AC and Convex, or Terra/Luna buying CVX to control Curve governance to support UST, they were all focus battles. This can be said to be basic common sense for senior Web3 players.
Pendle and Aero, the 100x coins in this round, also adopted this model. Even Cake relied on this model to stop falling and rebound.
Are the resources invested by Binance in BSC going to better projects? What is the difference between NFP/Cyber/ID/Hook and other BSC projects that have received investment and listing support and Aero?
Putting aside the poor quality of the projects, which have long been criticized, these projects lack positive externalities and are relatively isolated. CB gave Aero one cent and turned it into three points of ecological incentives, while Binance’s ten cents were directly wasted, and it is easy to form a reverse screening for developers.
In fact, reverse filtering is already in effect, and developers have already started jumping ship
The Thena team focuses on Base's new project IntentX, and Magpie's new subDAO also focuses on the ETH system. Although a large portion of the subDAO's profits will eventually flow back to MGP on BSC, how can the main DAO stay on a chain that lacks synergy with other new subDAOs for a long time?
In summary, the main difference lies in
Coinbase has focused its resources on projects that have positive externalities for the Base ecosystem. Spending resources on high-quality developers continues to attract high-quality developers to join.
Binance invested resources in the BSC project without positive externalities, which wasted ten cents of money. Instead, it did more harm than good for the ecological project with positive externalities. It seems that they don’t understand web3, which led to high-quality developers jumping ship.
This thread only uses ve(3,3) DEX as an example to explain the problem, but the problem reflected is representative.
Base does not issue its own coin. BNB has outperformed the market recently due to its frequent listings. However, the price increase of this coin still depends on imagination. If the chain can be made more flexible, BNB's room for growth can be further opened. We will continue to evaluate and observe the subsequent changes.
