#termmax @TermMax When the points stop paying, what remains?
I think this is the more interesting question around TermMax right now.
Seeing 1.5M+ wallets and 90K+ daily actives sounds impressive, but I’m not sure wallet activity alone tells us how much people actually need the lending product.
If users are connecting wallets, doing tasks, collecting XP/AP/MP and completing campaigns mainly because there’s a future token attached to it, that’s still participation but it’s not the same thing as product demand.
The real experiment starts after TGE.
I’d be watching DAU, TVL, borrowing volume, utilization and especially fees. If people keep supplying, borrowing and generating economic activity when points become less important, then those huge wallet numbers start looking a lot more meaningful.
If activity falls off a cliff, then we’ve learned something too.
It doesn’t mean the 1.5M wallets were fake. It means they were primarily an acquisition metric, not proof of product-market fit.
There’s also another thing I wouldn’t ignore: “4/4 phases completed” is not the same as “4/4 paid.” Until the $TMX allocation formula and claim mechanics are clear, completing Season 0 still doesn’t tell each user what their actual payout will be.
So for me, @TermMax isn’t really at the verdict stage yet.
It’s at the measurement stage.
Before TGE, the question was:
how many users can incentives attract?
After TGE, the better question becomes: how many users stay because they actually need the product?
That difference could tell us much more than the wallet count ever will.
When the points stop paying, do you think TermMax’s activity will still hold up?
I think this is the more interesting question around TermMax right now.
Seeing 1.5M+ wallets and 90K+ daily actives sounds impressive, but I’m not sure wallet activity alone tells us how much people actually need the lending product.
If users are connecting wallets, doing tasks, collecting XP/AP/MP and completing campaigns mainly because there’s a future token attached to it, that’s still participation but it’s not the same thing as product demand.
The real experiment starts after TGE.
I’d be watching DAU, TVL, borrowing volume, utilization and especially fees. If people keep supplying, borrowing and generating economic activity when points become less important, then those huge wallet numbers start looking a lot more meaningful.
If activity falls off a cliff, then we’ve learned something too.
It doesn’t mean the 1.5M wallets were fake. It means they were primarily an acquisition metric, not proof of product-market fit.
There’s also another thing I wouldn’t ignore: “4/4 phases completed” is not the same as “4/4 paid.” Until the $TMX allocation formula and claim mechanics are clear, completing Season 0 still doesn’t tell each user what their actual payout will be.
So for me, @TermMax isn’t really at the verdict stage yet.
It’s at the measurement stage.
Before TGE, the question was:
how many users can incentives attract?
After TGE, the better question becomes: how many users stay because they actually need the product?
That difference could tell us much more than the wallet count ever will.
When the points stop paying, do you think TermMax’s activity will still hold up?