#BigTime This coin has a V-shaped hourly K-line. I don't know what happened. I found out after someone started to criticize me in the community.

Don't touch the coin that has a V-shaped reverse pattern due to an unknown incident. This content is just to remind everyone. There is no hint of any trading opportunity.

📍ATOR one-page report: Depin track under privacy enhancement

The Depin track is just right. In the past period of time, I have also analyzed several projects related to Depin. Depin itself is a relatively large track, and there are many sub-concepts and physical facilities that can be covered.

This article is a project analysis based on the combination of privacy concepts and Depin🔻

🗝Report outline
1. Project model analysis
2. Token economic distribution
3. Secondary trend

Thank you for your continued attention and continued sharing of various project analysis in the industry

You can read the full text on one page👇🏻

Are projects with randomly nested narratives worth doing? ❓

Now that the market has developed to a certain stage, various popular concepts have emerged, such as: re-staking, RWA, Depin, inscriptions and various texts, L2, ZK, etc.

(1) For some projects, you will find out when you come into contact with them: How can this guy do everything?

(2) For other projects, you will find out when you come into contact with them: Can this guy do this?

I just happened to come into contact with three of them recently. They do everything. Their roadmaps have everything. They have everything. This situation needs to be viewed from two perspectives. I will establish the first perspective and stand from the second perspective to see:

(1) Within the community: WOC! Good news, the project party is doing things and is still doing a lot of things

(2) Outside the community: What exactly is this project going to do?

📍Doing everything, the sense of direction is poor. Mountain birds and fish have different paths. Two completely different narratives are forced together. What else can the other party do except wanting to take advantage of the market hotspot to get you on board with fomo so that he can take your money?

If a project can figure out the G-spot of 1-2 users, it is very impressive (however, nesting too many narratives is also a way to figure out the G-spot, hhh)

It is not impossible to do such projects, but the other party's motivation for listing them in this way must be that the concept is greater than the reality. If you dance with wolves, you are either a beast or a piece of meat

It is possible that some projects did not develop in the past, and now they want to start a new narrative, but if they start too many stoves, then their original intention is not to cook ingredients, but to use you as ingredients.

In the previous retracement, the overall retracement of Shanzhai was really a lot, $METIS was almost cut in half before and after the decline

(It is currently at the 0.382 rebound position of the daily K-level decline)

The price of the retracement at $TAO should be 490

At this time, using Fibonacci to connect the high and low points for backtesting, we will find that whether it is 0.382 or 0.618, the support does not overlap with the market structure

This situation is because the previous upper shadow line pin distorts the backtest of the structure

Then we can directly use the existing high point overlap position found nearby

A few days ago, I also communicated with the team of an exchange and learned about their market strategy. I think it is very interesting. The reason I share it is that even if most exchanges in the market know about this strategy, they will not spend energy to do it.

The other party is a 21-year-old exchange, which is relatively new. It used to focus on the European and American markets. It only switched to the Chinese market last year. They are doing private domain games in Taiwan: cultivating and incubating KOLs, letting KOLs do community education and teach users how to trade.

This sounds like a very idealistic and long-term thing, but the other party did it. More importantly, I learned that the founding team of the other party had served as core personnel in various exchanges, but there is a prerequisite for doing this: having money📍

Because this is a short-term thing that is difficult to get a quick return, but in the long run, the user stickiness will be terrible.

However, there may be some other conflicts of interest involved, so I won’t extend it too much. I just sigh that there are still leaders in the market who pursue long-termism and healthy development of the industry.

In addition, I will extend some of the exchange cooperation methods I usually come into contact with: give you a high rebate. Every time I see this kind of BD, I want to ask: What era is this, brother...

Not to mention users in other regions, at least I think the cost of re-trust for users in our Chinese region is very high. They have been scared by various fake garbage exchanges in the past. High rebates will only attract those who want to make money from users as soon as possible, rather than establishing a long-term win-win relationship (of course, the two are not contradictory, but there are really few users who continue to educate users with extremely high rebates)

Recently, KOL rounds have been very popular. In fact, I have also come across [consultant rounds], which I think is also quite ridiculous, because I myself serve as a consultant in two projects.

Recently, one of the projects offered me a round - the consultant round. Coupled with the various bloody things in the recent KOL rounds, I think it is reasonable but also a little ridiculous.

(1) My understanding of the KOL round is that it is a way of delivering chips to form a long-term cooperative relationship between the project party and the KOL itself.

(2) The quota will not be too much, because the project party also needs to control to avoid the situation where KOLs dump a large amount of money during the TGE stage.

Therefore, based on the above two viewpoints, we can deduce a superficial conclusion: good project quotas will eventually only flow to high-quality content and KOLs with sufficient influence, otherwise the other party’s core purpose will not be achieved.

Therefore, for us viewers, we can deduce another layer: the ability to be brushed fans and homogenized content The projects that get the quota are either stupid or cut
(BUT: I don’t mean to mock matrix accounts like brushing fans, after all, everyone has a different way of making a living)
This is a very easy thing to judge, because it may not be easy for us to judge whether a project is good or not, but it is too easy to judge whether an account actually has something
Finally, my own feelings about this topic: because there are many projects that ask me to invest in KOL rounds, but I really don’t have any (but there is one that I am talking about, because it is a project that I have cooperated with for a long time)
This thing really needs to be carefully screened. I heard a sentence during this trip to Dubai that is worth mentioning: In fact, in a cycle, each market participant can only run with two or three projects, and big opportunities often come from running with them
=The running here means long-term participation in construction, publicity, etc., and growing with the project

$OMNI has been cut by 50%+ since its launch. This should be the worst performance among recent launches. The style is a bit like DWF's market making, which is to pull and smash after launch.

To be honest, it will be very uncomfortable to hold DWF's coins. This market maker is also the most famous for being scolded.

The current price is at the support price of 0.618, and there are still trading opportunities in the short cycle.

Fan tokens are actually an event ambush type. If you miss the ambush period and enter later, we will be the ones to take over the ambush period.

In fact, as early as two or three months ago, I said that you can enter the fan token ambush stage. You don’t have to refer to my support, but you have to pay attention.

Now as the event approaches, the holding value will continue to decrease until the good news turns to bad news.

Let me talk about $ENA

This agreement has a positive profit business, but there was news that the agreement had negative income. In fact, I need to distinguish whether this is a sustainable event

Because when the news came out on the 14th, it was expressed as negative income for the week. Remember the key word "week". Those who have done business know that it is impossible to have no profit and loss fluctuations

It is enough to extend the battle line and the income is large and positive. ENA is such an example

What is the left top and bottom?

Alas, the guy who replied to the comment below is wrong, it is not the left side = top

In an upward trend, it is speculated that the market has reached the top and will start to fall, so you can consider placing a short position; in a downward trend, it is speculated that the market has reached the bottom and will start to rise, so you can consider placing a long position

$ETH fell to the 0.618 support level of the daily K level, which matched the consensus

Guess the top and bottom on the left side, and make a top and bottom reversal at the resistance or support price position of a trend. I use the common left-side trading method

At the same time, the left side should also reduce the position accordingly

It is a pity that the convergence relay before $BTC did not break upward, so that a strong resistance pattern of triple tops has been formed on the daily K-line.

In addition, 70,000 is in the strong consensus area. If you do a long order in a small cycle, you should pay more attention to the market pressure in this place, which can be directly used as a small cycle stop profit point.

$SOL is actually much better than the $WIF daily K trend I quoted, because the next resistance will be higher, although they have similar K line conditions: M top pattern + current price is at 0.382 of the downtrend rebound position

So the conclusion is that from a trading perspective: SOL will be better than WIF

$WIF daily K encountered support and rebounded yesterday. The current price is at the 0.318 rebound resistance price in the downward trend.

This kind of rebound resistance + level M short position resistance is quite difficult to deal with. In addition, the current market sentiment is actually quite bad. Those who are short-term and safe can change the target.

In addition, the profit and loss ratio is close to 1:1, and the transaction cost performance is a bit poor.

This should not be considered an afterthought. Before $SAGA went online, I said that in the early distribution of tokens, new coin mining accounted for 75%

Although we can see that the reported circulation is around 10%, the actual initial circulation is 6%, of which new coins account for 4.5%

The early surge was actually quite unexpected. There are always friends asking in the comment area. I said before that I don’t like coins related to the game sector because the routes are very tormenting

Block space and Polkadot 2.0$DOT 🔻

Before talking about the concept of Polkadot 2.0, we need to popularize some pre-knowledge about "block space": Block space can be said to be an abstract concept description. Let me give a more concrete example.

(1) You can imagine the blockchain as a highway, each block is like a section of the highway, and the block space is the number of available lanes in each section. Just as each section of the highway can only accommodate a certain number of vehicles, each block of the blockchain can only process a certain amount of data and transactions.

(2) When transaction demand is high and block space is limited, it will cause long-term congestion, just like peak traffic hours on the highway. This congestion may lead to an increase in on-chain transaction fees.

On the contrary, when there are fewer transactions and more available block space is idle, it is like off-peak hours on the highway. Less traffic congestion, transactions can be processed faster and at lower costs

The above is a description of some scenarios for block space. Based on this example, I will take the transition from Polkadot 1.0 to 2.0 as an example:

(1) Polkadot 1.0 is the grand parallel chain & relay chain model. The ecosystem builds L1 under the Polkadot framework through auctioning slots. This has a big disadvantage, that is, the early startup cost is very high and cumbersome;

(2) Last year, a 2.0 concept was proposed. Simply put, applications can purchase corresponding network performance (block space) according to their own performance requirements, which is a bit like further slicing the original blocks for distribution.

The transition from Polkadot 1.0 to 2.0 is a shift from the chain level to the application level. From a landlord to a "shared office" business model

This is different from the current "chain application prosperity" pattern planning of "ten thousand chains interconnected". The core of this planning is not the expansion of the chain, but a new way of allocating resources.

A brief discussion on on-chain and off-chain expansion🔻

In fact, the expansion plan is a kind of patch thinking. If the facilities of the chain itself are sufficient to support the development requirements of the ecosystem from the beginning, there will be no expansion plan to dominate or even become the mainstream (of course, it is a bit of nonsense to say this now)

According to the camp, there are two types of expansion plans: on-chain expansion and off-chain expansion

Let's talk about on-chain expansion first, which is to make changes to the underlying facilities of the chain itself, such as changing the block capacity, block speed, etc. The early $BTC hard fork battle involved on-chain expansion. The community hoped to vote to expand the block capacity to support the growing transaction scale of the network.

Under the checks and balances of various complex factors, the large block plan was not chosen by the mainstream group at that time and now (not because on-chain expansion is not good, but because this step is indeed too large to adjust at the development stage).

And the various $ETH series Rollup, side chain and even BTC series lightning channel plans discussed by the mainstream at present are all off-chain expansion.

That is, it can be completed without changing the original chain architecture. For example, the second layer such as ARB and OP has even progressed to the point where the second layer is a more narratively correct path. Therefore, in the current ecological development of BTC, there are not many voices to change the original chain, but to build various off-chain infrastructure as the future ecological scene.

(The ecological development path of ETH is expected to be repeated on BTC)

In addition, for these two plans, the mainstream is still off-chain for the time being, and parallel evm is a compromise solution for on-chain expansion. We can find an opportunity to talk more about it later.

-Project Analysis: DexCheck🔻

1. Data analysis is a track with relatively small C-end demand. At present, the market is more familiar with ARKM, which has formed a vertical competitive relationship with it and has issued tokens in this track

Referring to ARKM, the market participants' demand analysis of its business is also relatively vague. However, ARKM's C-end market is also constantly opening up through a series of VIP plans. From the fundamentals, background resources to market operation capabilities, DexCheck may need to pay more attention to the technical side (referring to the trend of tokens) for market participants

2. From the perspective of the AI ​​track, this track It is expected to be in 2024, but unfortunately, the AI ​​track is very messy, with all kinds of narratives embedded. If we just want to bet on the AI ​​track, there is no need to choose this target. The market label (consensus) is not enough.

3. Even if its product interface experience is relatively comfortable and smooth, its DCK token is mainly used as a paid token and governance for the advanced version of the product. The supply and demand model comes from the demand for the product itself.

Market demand needs to be explored (not much), and the gameplay of the token is not very distinctive. The market value of 30 million, plus the limited track expectations, is really average overall.

1) We can’t always be right. For spot trading, being right a few times is enough.
2) We can’t buy everything. It’s enough to have a position in the right target.
3) DYOR is not a four-letter phrase to evade responsibility, but an investment philosophy that should be put into practice.