Content
@
https://warpcast.com/~/channel/midwits
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
basil (propagation arc)
@itsbasil
this $aixbt launch of $abyss only for it to have trouble breaking 1m feels like some last hope quasi-vampire on attention & lowkey a subtle admittance of defeat from perhaps the virtuals eco at-large & their kingmaker i know it’s not mutually exclusive/different usps/makes little sense & that xbt is & has been bullish on $bnkr from the outset, but there was almost no peel from bnkr to abyss, in fact, the opposite, which is telling, given how many clanker launches have ultimately ended up diluted themselves with any secondary as liquidity chased you can argue that it was just an experiment to show the new clank-from-x capabilities, but the market doesn’t lie; abyss would be minimum 10m under any other market conditions they came for bnkr, “why would someone want to do this in public?” so deployer gave them a private terminal; he’s shipping faster than five person full time teams the era of pure attention capture is weaning; virtuals will reprice; bnkr & clanker to a billion—a new dawn is here
6 replies
0 recast
17 reactions
grunt.eth
@grunt.eth
it's generally a bad idea to split attention/launch multiple tokens from the same profile - like a self-vampire attack any good examples where it worked?
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
basil (propagation arc)
@itsbasil
no i’ve chirped about this forever launching any second token immediately dilutes & hurts credibility; even mentioning another from a corp/founder account is an unnecessary risk only way it works is if you lock them up in a flywheel/diff usp; think bnkr is one of the only successful attempts & that’s because i think ham/tn100x branding was already confusing as shit & deployer recently locked them up
0 reply
0 recast
3 reactions
