In a put up on X this previous weekend, Quinn Thompson, Chief Funding Officer (CIO) of Lekker Capital, declared that Ethereum (ETH) is “fully lifeless” as an funding. His feedback sparked a flurry of responses from outstanding figures within the crypto business, together with Nic Carter of Fortress Island Ventures, Columbia Enterprise College professor Omid Malekan, and VB Capital’s Scott Johnsson.
Thompson, who oversees investments at Lekker Capital, set off the debate with a put up stating: “Make no mistake, ETH as an funding is totally lifeless. A $225 billion market cap community that’s seeing declines in transaction exercise, person progress and costs/revenues. There isn’t a funding case right here. As a community with utility? Sure. As an funding? Completely not.”
He additionally shared a set of metrics to underscore Ethereum’s current stagnation, together with information on lively addresses, transaction counts, and new handle creation.
Is Ethereum ‘Useless’ As An Funding?
The provocative assertion attracted quick responses from outstanding voices throughout the crypto ecosystem, triggering a debate over Ethereum’s financial and funding thesis, and particularly, the affect of Layer 2 (L2) scaling options on Ethereum’s native token economics.
Nic Carter, companion at Fortress Island Ventures and co-founder of blockchain analytics agency Coinmetrics, swiftly responded, pinpointing Ethereum’s valuation dilemma squarely on the toes of its Layer 2 scaling implementations:“The #1 reason behind that is grasping eth L2s siphoning worth from the L1 and the social consensus that extra token creation was A-OK. Eth was buried in an avalanche of its personal tokens. Died by its personal hand.”
Thompson bolstered Carter’s criticism by suggesting that Ethereum’s group consensus had inadvertently favored token proliferation as a wealth-generation mechanism, finally undermining ETH’s funding narrative: “The social consensus amongst .eth’s in favor of extra tokens was as a result of the creation of countless L2s, staking, restaking, DA, and many others and many others all enriched their pockets on the way in which up however nobody needs to face the music now that the market is saying that was a mistake.”
Nevertheless, this viewpoint was contested by Omid Malekan, professor at Columbia Enterprise College and specialist in cryptocurrency and blockchain expertise since 2019. Malekan underscored Layer 2s’ vital function in blockchain scalability and argued that any value-extraction by these secondary layers was not inherently detrimental to Ethereum’s foundational token economics: “L2s are the one viable strategy to scale any blockchain. Whether or not their tokens seize worth or not is a separate query. However it could’t be that L2s ‘siphoned worth from ETH’ but didn’t seize worth themselves. Safety will not be free.”
Malekan additional challenged Thompson’s declare by questioning whether or not Ethereum may realistically grow to be the primary instance in historical past of a broadly adopted technological community whose utility didn’t generate any significant monetary return: “Is Ethereum going to be the primary community ‘with utility’ in trendy historical past the place the community results aren’t monetized? Are you able to present another examples of this occurring?”
In response, Thompson clarified his argument, highlighting that monetization is certainly occurring inside the Ethereum ecosystem, however not sufficiently accruing to ETH itself to validate the cryptocurrency’s present market capitalization. He illustrated this level with an analogy: “There’s tons of community results being monetized in every single place, simply not sufficient to ETH to justify its present valuation. Do all of the community results of the oil community and utilization of oil accrue to grease?”
Nevertheless, the oil analogy drew skepticism from Scott Johnsson, Basic Associate at VB Capital, who critiqued Thompson’s comparability resulting from Ethereum’s distinctive tokenomics, significantly its deflationary token burning mechanics influenced instantly by community utilization:
“I don’t disagree together with your directional name, however I feel this analogy falls flat. ETH ‘manufacturing’ is inversely correlated with utilization, which is actually not the case with oil. In order oil worth will increase, there’s a demand response and a provide response. With ETH, it’s restricted to the demand response. If ETH consumption appears to be like like barrel consumption, then the worth of ETH is way extra more likely to accrue worth.”
But Thompson continued to disagree with Johnsson’s evaluation, arguing that historic patterns don’t essentially help the declare of inverse correlation between Ethereum manufacturing and utilization: “I disagree. We’ve by no means seen a sustained time period the place ‘ETH manufacturing is inversely correlated with utilization.’ Clearly, the ‘manufacturing’ mechanics differ from oil, however equally excessive ETH worth is prohibitive to demand, therefore L2s and cheaper different L1s.”
Acknowledging a attainable misunderstanding, Johnsson clarified he was not predicting future Ethereum utilization situations, emphasizing as an alternative the theoretically inverse relationship between token burn and transaction quantity underneath the present Ethereum community design: “I feel we’re speaking previous one another a bit. I don’t assume it’s debatable that if ETH utilization will increase that it results in extra burn and fewer inflation (manufacturing). I’m particularly not making future predictions on that utilization. In any occasion, your final level is ok imo as a result of the demand facet is so delicate to essentially any value.”
At press time, ETH traded at $1,793.
Featured picture created with DALL.E, chart from TradingView.com
Editorial Course of for bitcoinist is centered on delivering totally researched, correct, and unbiased content material. We uphold strict sourcing requirements, and every web page undergoes diligent assessment by our crew of high expertise specialists and seasoned editors. This course of ensures the integrity, relevance, and worth of our content material for our readers.
In a put up on X this previous weekend, Quinn Thompson, Chief Funding Officer (CIO) of Lekker Capital, declared that Ethereum (ETH) is “fully lifeless” as an funding. His feedback sparked a flurry of responses from outstanding figures within the crypto business, together with Nic Carter of Fortress Island Ventures, Columbia Enterprise College professor Omid Malekan, and VB Capital’s Scott Johnsson.
Thompson, who oversees investments at Lekker Capital, set off the debate with a put up stating: “Make no mistake, ETH as an funding is totally lifeless. A $225 billion market cap community that’s seeing declines in transaction exercise, person progress and costs/revenues. There isn’t a funding case right here. As a community with utility? Sure. As an funding? Completely not.”
He additionally shared a set of metrics to underscore Ethereum’s current stagnation, together with information on lively addresses, transaction counts, and new handle creation.
Is Ethereum ‘Useless’ As An Funding?
The provocative assertion attracted quick responses from outstanding voices throughout the crypto ecosystem, triggering a debate over Ethereum’s financial and funding thesis, and particularly, the affect of Layer 2 (L2) scaling options on Ethereum’s native token economics.
Nic Carter, companion at Fortress Island Ventures and co-founder of blockchain analytics agency Coinmetrics, swiftly responded, pinpointing Ethereum’s valuation dilemma squarely on the toes of its Layer 2 scaling implementations:“The #1 reason behind that is grasping eth L2s siphoning worth from the L1 and the social consensus that extra token creation was A-OK. Eth was buried in an avalanche of its personal tokens. Died by its personal hand.”
Thompson bolstered Carter’s criticism by suggesting that Ethereum’s group consensus had inadvertently favored token proliferation as a wealth-generation mechanism, finally undermining ETH’s funding narrative: “The social consensus amongst .eth’s in favor of extra tokens was as a result of the creation of countless L2s, staking, restaking, DA, and many others and many others all enriched their pockets on the way in which up however nobody needs to face the music now that the market is saying that was a mistake.”
Nevertheless, this viewpoint was contested by Omid Malekan, professor at Columbia Enterprise College and specialist in cryptocurrency and blockchain expertise since 2019. Malekan underscored Layer 2s’ vital function in blockchain scalability and argued that any value-extraction by these secondary layers was not inherently detrimental to Ethereum’s foundational token economics: “L2s are the one viable strategy to scale any blockchain. Whether or not their tokens seize worth or not is a separate query. However it could’t be that L2s ‘siphoned worth from ETH’ but didn’t seize worth themselves. Safety will not be free.”
Malekan additional challenged Thompson’s declare by questioning whether or not Ethereum may realistically grow to be the primary instance in historical past of a broadly adopted technological community whose utility didn’t generate any significant monetary return: “Is Ethereum going to be the primary community ‘with utility’ in trendy historical past the place the community results aren’t monetized? Are you able to present another examples of this occurring?”
In response, Thompson clarified his argument, highlighting that monetization is certainly occurring inside the Ethereum ecosystem, however not sufficiently accruing to ETH itself to validate the cryptocurrency’s present market capitalization. He illustrated this level with an analogy: “There’s tons of community results being monetized in every single place, simply not sufficient to ETH to justify its present valuation. Do all of the community results of the oil community and utilization of oil accrue to grease?”
Nevertheless, the oil analogy drew skepticism from Scott Johnsson, Basic Associate at VB Capital, who critiqued Thompson’s comparability resulting from Ethereum’s distinctive tokenomics, significantly its deflationary token burning mechanics influenced instantly by community utilization:
“I don’t disagree together with your directional name, however I feel this analogy falls flat. ETH ‘manufacturing’ is inversely correlated with utilization, which is actually not the case with oil. In order oil worth will increase, there’s a demand response and a provide response. With ETH, it’s restricted to the demand response. If ETH consumption appears to be like like barrel consumption, then the worth of ETH is way extra more likely to accrue worth.”
But Thompson continued to disagree with Johnsson’s evaluation, arguing that historic patterns don’t essentially help the declare of inverse correlation between Ethereum manufacturing and utilization: “I disagree. We’ve by no means seen a sustained time period the place ‘ETH manufacturing is inversely correlated with utilization.’ Clearly, the ‘manufacturing’ mechanics differ from oil, however equally excessive ETH worth is prohibitive to demand, therefore L2s and cheaper different L1s.”
Acknowledging a attainable misunderstanding, Johnsson clarified he was not predicting future Ethereum utilization situations, emphasizing as an alternative the theoretically inverse relationship between token burn and transaction quantity underneath the present Ethereum community design: “I feel we’re speaking previous one another a bit. I don’t assume it’s debatable that if ETH utilization will increase that it results in extra burn and fewer inflation (manufacturing). I’m particularly not making future predictions on that utilization. In any occasion, your final level is ok imo as a result of the demand facet is so delicate to essentially any value.”
At press time, ETH traded at $1,793.
Featured picture created with DALL.E, chart from TradingView.com
Editorial Course of for bitcoinist is centered on delivering totally researched, correct, and unbiased content material. We uphold strict sourcing requirements, and every web page undergoes diligent assessment by our crew of high expertise specialists and seasoned editors. This course of ensures the integrity, relevance, and worth of our content material for our readers.
