my humble thoughts after @Eli5defi's article I've mentioned this to many that I'm not convinced any current RWA perps solution actually works at scale perpification of assets fails the industry terribly the core problem I see = spot tokenization fundamentally doesn't work at scale CME gold futures $20M trade = 3bps slippage tokenized gold perpetuals $4M trade = 150bps slippage 50x worse execution for tokeniztion innovation, makes no sense market makers won't provide depth because economics don't work: - mint fees 10-50bps - warehouse inventory T+1 to T+5 settlement - opportunity cost vs instant-settle crypto strategies death spiral. shallow liquidity → low volume → MM exits → worse liquidity funding rate erosion destroys long-term potential so we have contradiction: - spot tokenization: proper collateral but no liquidity - perp exposure: great liquidity but bleeding cost and no collateral use I'm positioned for perpification winning trading volume and spot tokenization staying niche for collateral use cases - but nobody's building the bridge between them - that's the opportunity - how do I get perp-level liquidity execution with spot-level composability and no funding bleed - whoever solves that captures entire RWA market perpification is future of trading exposure spot remains future of ownership. until then RWA remains broken regardless of perp numbers twitter.com/arndxt_xo/status/2...

Yess, i think perpification sits like temporay band-aid until we have better solution. Perps gained traction because we have perps season rn, so possibly we might see something innovation from it. Thanks for the shout-out as well Ser!