Whales really do have too much money—they can lose 637,000

Post

Whales really do have too much money—they can lose 637,000 just trading on @papertrade_xyz. To be fair, it was entirely predictable that you’d lose money generating volume on @papertrade_xyz; the cited post explained it very clearly. A few friends told me they were glad they saw the post I shared that day, or they would’ve taken a brutal loss.

If the token is a futures contract and all the dividends depend on later users buying your bags, the whole model just doesn’t work. Imagine the earning multiplier for
$paper dropping, while you still can’t cash out your $paper.
Who would keep getting liquidated and losing money just to generate volume? The only people who’d do that are selfless heroes, sacrificing themselves for everyone else.

Congrats to everyone who avoided the $paper trap. Also, it looks like we successfully got out at the top of this $PULP run—the moment Paperstrade started generating volume was the peak for $PULP.

Jealousy尼卡

What exactly is the relationship between $PULP and $PAPER, and is @papertrade_xyz worth jumping into?

First, $PULP is PaperDAO’s token, while $PAPER is Papertrade’s token.

Holding $PULP means indirectly owning a corresponding share of PaperDAO’s treasury. The DAO raises funds to participate in Papertrade, then redistributes the $PAPER it receives to $PULP holders.

Put simply, the value of $PULP depends heavily on how $PAPER performs. On top of that, there’s the DAO’s operations and governance, as well as the treasury’s net asset value—and the redemption mechanism is still unknown. If you’re bullish on Paperstrade, an on-chain synthetic perpetuals protocol in the Hyperliquid ecosystem, it’s more straightforward to just buy $PAPER directly.

As for whether @papertrade_xyz is worth jumping into, first you need to understand how you get $PAPER: you receive token compensation when you get liquidated, meaning the more you lose, the more tokens you get (although the compensation multiplier decreases linearly). I don’t think it’s worth putting a lot of money into this. You could try it with a small amount, for three main reasons:

1. The tokens you receive for losing money can’t be traded right away; you have to wait for them to unlock. In other words, you’ve traded real USDT for a pile of futures. That’s extremely risky, and personally, I don’t like gambling this way.

2. The tokenomics are incredibly weak. You’re already getting tokens by losing money, and there’s no buyback-and-burn mechanism either. Combined with point 1, that means potentially unlimited selling pressure and token issuance in the future. While you’re waiting for your tokens to unlock, the futures you’re holding will keep losing value.
If the team acts in good faith and unlocks them early, you might make money. If they don’t, you’re the one left holding the bag.

3. How big is the market for high-leverage perpetuals, really? Honestly, $PAPER’s value capture depends entirely on this protocol’s revenue sharing. I’m not bullish on demand for this kind of high-leverage casino—true gamblers are still a minority. Early hype around a project doesn’t mean much; people are mostly using it for the token. And there’s a paradox here: the more popular the protocol gets, the greater the selling pressure on the token. That’s why I say the tokenomics are incredibly weak. Regardless of how well the protocol does, the token price may struggle to rise.

Although I still hold $PULP, overall I’m not bullish on the long-term prospects of either of these tokens. This is just my personal opinion, so take it for what it’s worth. I hope the whales behind them prove me spectacularly wrong.

Disclaimer: Includes third-party opinions. No advice. Binance AI may be used without guarantee. See T&Cs.