2026-01-19 19:28:16

Recently, I have noticed that some paid registration projects are extremely popular, with a lot of discussion in a short period of time. But thinking about the projects in history that adopted a registration fee model, there seem to be very few that are truly successful. Is this phenomenon driven by marketing, or does the project itself genuinely have appeal? It's worth pondering. The fee threshold often serves as a filtering mechanism, but it can also become an invisible risk for the project—it's important to be cautious about whether the hype can be translated into genuine ecosystem development.

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

7 Likes

Reward
7
6
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

MEVHunterX

· 7h ago

Really, is this another round of the same old money-grabbing scheme? I just have to laugh at the hype around paid projects. --- You can't be fooled by hype, but you can't fool ecological development either. Just watch. --- Paid registration? First, see if the project team has actually spent money to get in. --- All the lessons from history are right here, yet people still jump into the trap. Marketing always wins. --- The screening mechanism sounds good, but it's really just a quick scam and run. Is there enough liquidity? --- Let's wait and see. No matter how hot it gets, how many people will still be here after six months? --- I just want to know, who is footing the bill for this hype? --- Again with this model, how does no one learn their lesson? --- Ecology? First, ask if there are actual application scenarios before bragging.

View OriginalReply0

GateUser-cff9c776

· 7h ago

Here is the translation: Once again, it's the same old trick of charging for entry. Honestly, it's just to create a sense of scarcity. --- From the supply and demand curve, the paid entry threshold is essentially a scam to filter out participants, and those who get filtered out are often the bagholders. --- Historically, the floor prices of such projects have fallen to what level? Are people still rushing in? --- To be honest, hype ≠ ecosystem. This equation has never been valid in Web3. --- Schrödinger's bull market — paid projects are both mechanisms and traps. You never know whether you're the early mover or the last in line. --- According to traditional art valuation models, this is the bubble within a bubble during the bubble period. But I still went all in because I bet on the next wave of bagholders' bagholders. --- Does a loud marketing buzz mean the project is good? Then Buffett would be furious. That's clearly a contrarian indicator. --- A true DAO governance mechanism doesn't require you to pay to enter; it requires genuine participation rights. This thing is the opposite. --- It looks like a professional screening mechanism, but in reality, it's just a harvesting device for a Ponzi scheme. Don't be fooled by the terminology.

View OriginalReply0

FloorSweeper

· 7h ago

lol the paid entry trap never gets old... watched this cycle like five times already, every time same ending 💀

Reply0

LidoStakeAddict