people assume that every chain's revenue is derived from fees.
This is 100% wrong and why many people's framework for Plasma's rev potential is misleading.
you HAVE to delineate between product-led (hyperliquid) and developer-led (ethereum/solana).
applying a "chain-level fees" framework to a product-led chain leads to a complete misrepresentation of future growth potential and bad relative valuations.
most recent example: Plasma.
plasma's transfer fees are non-existent because if they succeed in scaling, they'll make far more $ via a consumer app that enables them to take a fee at the point of sale + whatever other front-end consumer offerings they decide to integrate.
The same goes for Hyperliquid, Abstract, Story and a whole host of other chains that are forgoing chain-level revenue in exchange for long-term "product-level" revenue.
7.3K
0
The content on this page is provided by third parties. Unless otherwise stated, OKX is not the author of the cited article(s) and does not claim any copyright in the materials. The content is provided for informational purposes only and does not represent the views of OKX. It is not intended to be an endorsement of any kind and should not be considered investment advice or a solicitation to buy or sell digital assets. To the extent generative AI is utilized to provide summaries or other information, such AI generated content may be inaccurate or inconsistent. Please read the linked article for more details and information. OKX is not responsible for content hosted on third party sites. Digital asset holdings, including stablecoins and NFTs, involve a high degree of risk and can fluctuate greatly. You should carefully consider whether trading or holding digital assets is suitable for you in light of your financial condition.