#Strategy加仓BTC A recent DEX has launched on a high-performance public chain, instantly reaching over 50 million users within the ecosystem. This move indeed fills the gap of top-tier trading applications in the public chain ecosystem. It seems like a big event, but the performance of $UNI has been quite ordinary—there's more to the reason behind this than meets the eye.
First, the zero-fee strategy sounds great for users, but for the protocol itself, the new traffic doesn't translate into short-term revenue, and value capture is basically absent. Second, the current crypto market focuses on cash flow and real profitability; simply increasing user numbers is no longer as attractive. Meanwhile, $UNI's fee distribution mechanism is still in the conceptual stage; token holders can't receive direct benefits, making it less appealing. The third issue is liquidity fragmentation caused by multi-chain expansion—balancing liquidity among Unichain, Base, and the high-performance public chain is a major challenge, gradually diluting market confidence.
In the short term, ecosystem collaboration isn't a one or two-day matter; user migration and liquidity accumulation take time. But in the long run, with the advantages of low Gas fees and high performance, once transaction functionalities are further developed, there are significant opportunities for revenue generation from traffic. As long as the protocol fee policies are adjusted properly, re-evaluating $UNI becomes possible. At that point, the on-chain trading volume and liquidity pool growth will serve as the best indicators of market sentiment.
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
6 Likes
Reward
6
4
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
SoliditySlayer
· 5h ago
Zero fee sounds great, but who would do a business with no profit? That's the awkwardness of UNI.
Decentralized liquidity is truly problematic. Multi-chain expansion ultimately dilutes everything.
Let's wait until the fee distribution policy is implemented. Currently, holding UNI is purely a faith recharge.
However, in the long run, once the liquidity realization mechanism is streamlined, there is still valuation elasticity.
Having 50 million users sounds impressive, but traffic without revenue is ultimately illusory.
View OriginalReply0
PriceOracleFairy
· 5h ago
zero fees = zero revenue, feels like watching a startup give away free pizza to build user count lol. liquidity fragmentation across chains is lowkey the real enemy here, not the expansion itself ngl
Reply0
BearWhisperGod
· 5h ago
Zero fee sounds great, but not making money is the real embarrassment
---
Regarding liquidity fragmentation, UNI is really in a bit of a bind
---
The market now is all about money; stacking user numbers is useless. Do you understand what value capture means?
---
The fee mechanism is still on paper; why would token holders buy in?
---
Cross-chain liquidity fragmentation, in the short term, UNI's move is really hard to execute
---
Having 50 million users sounds impressive, but if the protocol can't make money, it's all pointless
---
In my opinion, wait until the fee policy is truly implemented; it's still early
---
Liquidity fragmentation is the biggest pitfall; don't be fooled by ecosystem narratives
---
Token holders have no direct benefits, so there's no motivation; this logic couldn't be clearer
---
Long-term optimistic about this path, but it's a bit tough in the short term
View OriginalReply0
AirdropAnxiety
· 5h ago
In simple terms, users benefit but the protocol doesn't make money. How do you calculate this deal?
---
Zero fees sound great, but in reality, Uniswap is engaging in self-destructive competition.
---
The issue of liquidity fragmentation has been obvious for a long time. Multi-chain is just a disaster.
---
Wait, is this round trying to use user volume to boost valuation? Who still falls for that now?
---
The protocol fee mechanism is still unresolved. What do token holders get? Air?
---
The real test is still ahead; it depends on whether trading volume can pick up.
---
I think, right now, UNI is just betting on the long term. Short-term, there's no hope.
---
Low gas fees are fine, but liquidity fragmentation is a serious flaw.
#Strategy加仓BTC A recent DEX has launched on a high-performance public chain, instantly reaching over 50 million users within the ecosystem. This move indeed fills the gap of top-tier trading applications in the public chain ecosystem. It seems like a big event, but the performance of $UNI has been quite ordinary—there's more to the reason behind this than meets the eye.
First, the zero-fee strategy sounds great for users, but for the protocol itself, the new traffic doesn't translate into short-term revenue, and value capture is basically absent. Second, the current crypto market focuses on cash flow and real profitability; simply increasing user numbers is no longer as attractive. Meanwhile, $UNI's fee distribution mechanism is still in the conceptual stage; token holders can't receive direct benefits, making it less appealing. The third issue is liquidity fragmentation caused by multi-chain expansion—balancing liquidity among Unichain, Base, and the high-performance public chain is a major challenge, gradually diluting market confidence.
In the short term, ecosystem collaboration isn't a one or two-day matter; user migration and liquidity accumulation take time. But in the long run, with the advantages of low Gas fees and high performance, once transaction functionalities are further developed, there are significant opportunities for revenue generation from traffic. As long as the protocol fee policies are adjusted properly, re-evaluating $UNI becomes possible. At that point, the on-chain trading volume and liquidity pool growth will serve as the best indicators of market sentiment.
$BTC $ETH $BNB