dd retweeted
it was brought to my attention that a token launched on standard's launchpad was removed from pumpfun's competition for "bundling" because 80% of its supply sits in one place
i want to clarify what this actually is, and why its the complete opposite of a bundle and actually a beneficial mechanism
first, what a bundle is: a deployer buys most of the supply across multiple wallets at launch, hides that theyre connected, waits for buyers, then dumps on them (or in the *optimistic* case, uses them for "supply control"). bundles are opaque and hide a token's real float
standard's launchpad lets deployers do what's called a "charter drop" which is the complete opposite of a bundle:
- charters are nfts held by participants in the @standard_rsv ecosystem. each holder has spent over 3 eth to join the protocol, and they've proven to be aligned, long term supporters of the projects they like
- deployers can choose to airdrop a percentage of supply (up to 80%) to charter holders. these tokens are locked in a vault contract, and charter holders cant access them unless they BURN their charter
- the airdrop isnt controlled by the deployer. the tokens sit in a single public contract, 0xb8748E02f07dd80F1DB99A49F92546B2210D844d, with no admin key and no owner withdrawal
- nothing is hidden. anyone can verify the mechanism and lock onchain, which is the opposite of a hidden bundle
- charter drops cant be dumped instantly. the tokens are split across every charter holder, not one wallet, and holders only receive their share by burning their charter. it's a public token lock with a real cost to unlock, not free supply ready to hit the market
were glad bundled tokens are being policed, but if this counts as a bundle, we'd urge you to look at the majority of the other tokens in this competition
as a side not, over 4M USD of tokens has been airdropped to charters and we've seen less than 5 charter burn to receive the airdropped tokens
since we're on the topic anyway, let's talk about market cap versus liquidity on charter drop tokens. dashboards count the locked 80% in market cap, so the market cap to liquidity ratio looks thin
but, measured against tradable supply, the pool is deeper than on other launchpad tokens since the same amount of liquidity supports a much smaller float, because most of the supply is locked. treating locked supply as tradable gives a misleading ratio
dd retweeted
Robinhood Chain will be fine.
This felt more like an Arbitrum event with a Robinhood stamp on it than a true RHC event. Very different from the World is Flat event. I'll hold my opinion until they run their own event.
Think about it from their side. Robinhood thinks in months/quarters like any traditional company. Onchain thinks in days/weeks. That gap makes the community feel left behind.
We have to think about things in context. We went from 0 to a top 5 chain in months, with more runners than every other chain over the last year COMBINED.
Now we're a month-ish into a steep pullback after 3 months of up only. What else did we expect?
A pullback was needed.
Needed a wash out of the froth.
When they all lose hope, run it back.
I can see why people are concerned. Real support is coming. A matter of when, not if.
I'm willing to be the last bull standing on this.
The problem with v4 hook tokens is that anyone can open a second pool for the same token without the hook, and traders and aggregators will happily route through whichever one is cheaper, so the fee that’s meant to pay holders and fund buybacks just never gets charged.
On Robinhood Chain alone, five v4 hook tokens have traded around $2B and less than 20% of it went through their official pools. Their hooks have collected around $3.4M when everything going through them could have brought in closer to $20M, and AI by itself missed out on nearly $8M.
Say you hold a token that pays you in stock tokens just for holding it. If it’s paid you $100 so far, you could have been paid closer to $570 had every trade gone through the hook, and the same gap runs through every buyback these fees were meant to fund.
URC-5, which @standard_rsv just got merged into the URC repo over at @Uniswap, lets a token publish which pools are its official ones so routers know where to send trades, and gives new tokens the option to block trading anywhere else. It works on any chain Uniswap v4 runs on, so this goes well beyond Robinhood Chain.
What’s also interesting is that Uniswap has continued to support Standard Reserve since before launch, from helping with the audit to getting the token unflagged on day one, and now they’ve added one of its proposals into their own repo.
I can't wait to see what comes from this relationship next.
dd retweeted
Umbra is coming to Robinhood Chain, powered by @NimbusPrivacy
Sign up for early access: v2.umbraprivacy.com/robinhoo…
dd retweeted
There are two aspects I look for in a token:
The first is a product people actually use. The most bullish tokens take a sector that already works like collectibles and rebuild it on crypto rails so the experience is better than what users had before.
The second is a mechanism that turns that use into buying the token, through buybacks from revenue, fees paid to holders, or the token being needed to use the product. That's the outside bid. It comes from the product's users, so it doesn't depend on sentiment.
A good product without it is a good company with a token attached. Buy that token and you're still trading attention, even while the business grows, because none of the growth reaches you. Value accrual without a good product is a buyback with nothing behind it.
More and more teams are realizing that putting their token first is +EV for the business instead of just extracting from it.
The visual shows the difference. Same product, same sentiment. Only one token has an outside bid that compounds every cycle. This excludes token movements but if both come together it create a highly reflexive token.
Few tokens tick both boxes today. I think that in the future, tokens without value accrual won't catch a bid again.
dd retweeted
hey, i’m sorry this happened but you are absolutely in the wrong here
if you paid $3,200 for an NFT, it’s your investment & it’s totally your job to read the docs & participate in the process
calling @standard_rsv a rug because you didn’t do due diligence on this part is a shitty attitude, that’s your loss
you say you’re on the website 24/7 but you never
- deposited any $standard ($1 counts)
- saw the big ass checkin button even once?
- read multiple updates from beans on the burn?
- slightly attempted to listen to the last ama?
plus, how was the website down for 48 hours when i’ve logged in every single day? it literally takes <10 seconds.
& just be truthful, this isn’t a case of “bad communication” or “a rug”
(i’d rather u just admit that u were inactive without trying to sound aggressive)
pushing the narrative that “abstract devs are ruggers” won’t get your 8000 $standard back.
sure, it’s a banking ponzi but systems operate differently & this was a rule from day 1.
to everyone else who had their charters burned, sorry it happened but game is game.
address it like it is.
Woke up to see -$2,400 in my account.
I paid 1.25 ETH ($3,200) for an @standard_rsv NFT through the auction. Just yesterday, I had over 8,000 $STANDARD.
Then, without any warning, they burned my NFT and gave me back only a small portion of what I had.
Their reason? "They burned inactive charters."
I'm literally on the website 24/7 because I never close the tab, and I check it daily.
No on-chain activity? That's because expanding branches is ridiculously expensive. The last time I checked, it would have cost around $2,000 just to expand.
And yes, I know about Dormant Bankers. I was actually planning to do something about it, but your website was down for 48 hours and has been flagged as "unsafe" since the update.
I bought my NFT through the auction, NOT the whitelist mint. I paid FULL PRICE for it, and you just burned it without any warning?
This can't be serious. @0xbeans
Y'all seriously need to improve how you communicate with your community. People have invested real money into this project, and decisions like this shouldn't come out of nowhere.
dd retweeted
on standard's launchpad you can airdrop tokens directly to charter holders
what makes this interesting is that tokens are locked behind branches and have the same exit mechanic as STANDARD, holders have to burn their branches to get the tokens out
additionally, these are people who have long term alignment to projects and are willing to put real capital behind their convictions
token deployers, think about it..
dd retweeted
Robinhood Chain just hit $100B in cumulative DEX volume.
A massive milestone for onchain trading and for the Robinhood Chain ecosystem.
Thank you to everyone building and trading with us.
ROBINHOOD CHAIN IS DEAD
Is the take I keep seeing all over my timeline right now, and I honestly think it’s a stupid one.
Outside of the OGs like Solana, BNB and Ethereum, we haven’t had a new chain break out and capture this much attention since Base, and four months in, Robinhood Chain is already the third-biggest chain by DEX volume over the past month, behind only Solana and Ethereum.
Robinhood Chain’s best week was about four times bigger than anything Base did in its first eight months, back when Base was actually doing well, and it got back above its launch high around five months sooner than Base did.
New chains move a lot like coins do at launch, where the early attention sends them up and then they pull back to retest the level they broke out from. That retest is exactly where Robinhood Chain’s volume is sitting right now, and it’s the same level Base’s biggest run started from.
Trading has slowed down since September, but TVL has kept climbing and just hit a new all-time high this week, which means the capital is sticking around even though the hype has cooled off a bit.
If you’re lumping Robinhood Chain in with every other new L2, you’re missing the biggest thing it has going for it, which is a stock brokerage with close to 29 million users, and less than 1% of them are onchain on any given day. With free swaps running until the end of the year and 24/7 stock token trading on the way, that’s a lot of runway for a chain that’s only four months old.
CT is an echo chamber. Once takes like “it’s dead” and “Base 2.0” get a bit of engagement, you start seeing them everywhere, to the point where they feel like the consensus, but the data doesn’t support that narrative.
Ultimately it comes down to what Vlad and the team do from here. He just did an AMA going over his plans for the chain and asking people what they want to see, and there’s talk of a lot more support coming from Robinhood. This is a company that built one of the biggest retail brokerages in the US, and I can’t see them settling for less in crypto.
dd retweeted
Four weeks of consolidation
Fattest liquidity base
High-quality, defi-native holders
Reduced inflation
Non-dilutive staking
Release of a unique launchpad and initial Stock Token liquidity pilot in two days
It's now or never for $STANDARD
The ticker is robinhood:0x88ad8ddf1e3898412146a534538d418c6f8a9062
Standard's launchpad and stock pools go live on the 14th October.
So far the market has valued Standard as a protocol that lives off trading in its own token. From Wednesday it starts earning from the stock and meme flow across all of Robinhood Chain.
It owns both the launchpad and the stock liquidity every launch trades against, so the fees from all that volume go straight back into the reserve.
Most launchpads only own one piece of that stack and still get priced in the hundreds of millions for it. Standard now owns the whole thing, and it's sitting at a fraction of that.
