A recent Coretime sale for 922.57 DOT revealed a deeper tension in @Polkadot: The network’s greatest strength—cheap, high-quality blockspace — might also be its biggest economic challenge. 🧵 From a developer’s view, Polkadot offers the lowest-cost, highest-quality blockspace for rollups—compared to top @ethereum L2s. This is seen as a key strength: low barriers, high performance. But from an investor’s view, Coretime is Polkadot’s only monetizable product, and many argue it’s drastically undervalued. Let’s talk numbers. 🧮 If Polkadot runs with 250 cores and spends $100M/year from the treasury, each core needs to generate $400K/year, or $30,769/28 days, just to break even. If JAM replaces the Relay Chain with 330 cores, each needs to generate $300K/year (~$23,000/28 day) just to cover part of the inflationary DOT issued. Meanwhile, the “auto-renew” mechanism lets rollups retain cores indefinitely with just a 3% monthly increase—bypassing competition entirely. Polkadot is known for its cutting-edge tech. But long-term growth requires a solid economic engine too. So what do you think? Low-cost access vs. long-term sustainability—can both exist in the same system? 🤔 Would love to hear thoughts from both builders and token holders.