A project that had already raised $12 million was shut down because it failed to raise the additional $1.5 million—what does this threshold screen for? On September 18, Linera explained the result in a community channel: during the public round, it received about $8.48 million in subscriptions from 617 participants, still roughly $6.5 million short of the $1.5 million minimum. Since it didn’t reach the line, the subscription funds were returned to the original addresses, and the subsequent emergency funding round also didn’t come to fruition.
The positions of the three layers of money are not the same: the private round funds have already arrived, while the public round depends on the threshold’s mood; in the community points section, even the exchange rate wasn’t written—among the three promises, only the earliest-arriving kind is actual cash.
On this track, I can put forward only three names. Aave’s revenue comes from the borrowing spread and liquidation fees—its seven-day fee is about $6.46 million, with roughly 292 tokens per day used for buybacks, and it has recently shut down deployments of 6 chains that don’t generate profits. Chainlink’s monthly fee is about $4.48 million to $4.82 million, with about 97% coming from data source subscriptions; the cross-chain line is only about $2.1 million, and the integration from 600 banks is merely an option. Sui’s year-to-date buybacks are about 609,800 coins, or about $490,000; the money comes from interest on on-chain stablecoin reserves, and on-chain stablecoin supply is about $463 million.
On the other hand, this line can be misread: a considerable portion of Aave’s buybacks is used to fund the ecosystem, while Sui doesn’t burn; and in the last 30 days, Chainlink’s own reserves only increased by about $5.5 million. None of the three bid sources is big enough to support a sustained market行情.
Projects that can receive money themselves, and projects that can only wait for the next round, look the same on the same leaderboard—the difference all lies in the cash-flow column. There are two checkpoints to consider: if, in the next quarter, these three companies’ fees and buybacks both move up as well, then I’ve underestimated this self-funding track; if revenue stays flat while the name keeps leaning on the financing narrative, then the screening line needs to be redrawn. To open these three names one by one on Binance, you can do it all with a single account: beyond buying and selling, the idle portion can also be put into wealth management, and platform token BNB is also one of the entry points in this setup. This article is an opinion record and does not constitute investment advice.$CELR
$ONE
$GENIUS
#linera筹款未达标宣布停运
The positions of the three layers of money are not the same: the private round funds have already arrived, while the public round depends on the threshold’s mood; in the community points section, even the exchange rate wasn’t written—among the three promises, only the earliest-arriving kind is actual cash.
On this track, I can put forward only three names. Aave’s revenue comes from the borrowing spread and liquidation fees—its seven-day fee is about $6.46 million, with roughly 292 tokens per day used for buybacks, and it has recently shut down deployments of 6 chains that don’t generate profits. Chainlink’s monthly fee is about $4.48 million to $4.82 million, with about 97% coming from data source subscriptions; the cross-chain line is only about $2.1 million, and the integration from 600 banks is merely an option. Sui’s year-to-date buybacks are about 609,800 coins, or about $490,000; the money comes from interest on on-chain stablecoin reserves, and on-chain stablecoin supply is about $463 million.
On the other hand, this line can be misread: a considerable portion of Aave’s buybacks is used to fund the ecosystem, while Sui doesn’t burn; and in the last 30 days, Chainlink’s own reserves only increased by about $5.5 million. None of the three bid sources is big enough to support a sustained market行情.
Projects that can receive money themselves, and projects that can only wait for the next round, look the same on the same leaderboard—the difference all lies in the cash-flow column. There are two checkpoints to consider: if, in the next quarter, these three companies’ fees and buybacks both move up as well, then I’ve underestimated this self-funding track; if revenue stays flat while the name keeps leaning on the financing narrative, then the screening line needs to be redrawn. To open these three names one by one on Binance, you can do it all with a single account: beyond buying and selling, the idle portion can also be put into wealth management, and platform token BNB is also one of the entry points in this setup. This article is an opinion record and does not constitute investment advice.$CELR
$ONE
$GENIUS
#linera筹款未达标宣布停运
