six
@six
we couldn't hold coins above 1m? smh come on guys
8 replies
3 recasts
29 reactions
jesse.base.eth 🔵
@jessepollak
probably shouldn't be worth >1m
2 replies
0 recast
12 reactions
Zinger ↑
@zinger
Why not?
1 reply
0 recast
3 reactions
SAINTLESS
@saintless.eth
why 1M?
2 replies
0 recast
1 reaction
six
@six
Valuation numbers are kind of arbitrary and useless in both directions imo By the same logic that it shouldn’t be worth more than 1m, there’s also no reason that it should be worth less than 1m Just flows at the end of the day
2 replies
0 recast
4 reactions
Zinger ↑
@zinger
Just surprising for me to see the head of Base actively shooting down valuations when his chain has struggled massively to gain any traction on memecoins against Solana and this is a critical time right now when Base can win back some volume
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
jesse.base.eth 🔵
@jessepollak
I think volumes and valuations on memecoins have historically been massively inflated by insider pump and dumps a return to healthier valuations is net positive for the space and a proliferation of low cap creativity is an abundant onchain future we want
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Zinger ↑
@zinger
Weird take imo The problem isn't the valuations, it's the insiders. We need better tools to ensure fairer distribution and prevent pump and dumps. That doesn't mean that valuations should come down. "An abundant onchain future of low cap creativity" doesn't make much sense to me. People buy things because they expect for them to increase in value. There's not much increase possible for a sub-100k coin, especially if you're not in the first couple of buyers. I totally agree that we should align holders with projects and incentivize them to think long-term but this messaging isn't it
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction