Thoughts on the development of Virtuals IPO, all in on high-consensus core projects, picking up "good trash" during the downturn. Today, the new round of @virtuals_io genesis has ended, with the much-anticipated @arbusai $ARBUS going live, currently valued at approximately $12 million, with IPO returns around 50x+, which should be within the ideal range, second only to the IPO returns of @AIxVC_Axelrod and @BasisOS. However, recently, some people have started to question whether such returns can be sustained, and even wonder if there is still a need to participate in genesis launches. The core reason might be that the projects launched earlier, except for a few top-tier ones, have been slowly declining in market value. This includes $ROAST, $WHIM, and yesterday's $XLLM2, which only doubled. In my view, this decline will continue because users who want to participate in IPOs and gain more returns need to consume 🔥 or lock 🔒 $VIRTUAL. In the continuous consumption of $VIRTUAL, users either: 1️⃣ Continue to buy $VIRTUAL in the secondary market 2️⃣ Or exchange previously profitable projects for $VIRTUAL Although the latter reduces diamond hands points, compared to the current $2 price of $VIRTUAL and the unpredictable decline of other projects, cashing out profits is not a bad choice. Therefore, projects with short-term hype but no active progress will inevitably decline, while the hype will shift to the top few projects. Currently, the three most hyped projects are strongly supported by the official team and will play an important role in the future ACP plan of Virtuals. Reference: My current thought is to participate as much as possible in projects with high "consensus". With limited attention, the returns from low-consensus projects after launch are becoming increasingly unpredictable. However, these "high consensus" projects need to be allocated points reasonably based on market hype. Although more people participated in today's $ARBUS, the situation of oversubscription has decreased, and the corresponding quota has increased. The only downside is that it didn't reach $15 million to match AXR, otherwise, with the same points, a reasonable allocation to $ARBUS would definitely yield higher returns. So, from the IPO perspective, I still think it's best to select the best among the best, strive to get a higher proportion of the quota, and aim for a critical hit. Additionally, the recent decline in projects doesn't necessarily mean they are all bad, but rather a natural shift in market attention. In this situation, if there are projects with good fundamentals that continue to be active and are selected by the official team, taking advantage of the opportunity to pick them up should also gradually lead to value discovery later on.