Comparing and analyzing Base and BSC, why is the BSC chain at a disadvantage despite having a good hand?

Original source: CapitalismLab

After a round of price increases, Base has supported the peak 1B Mcap, 2B FDV, and 100 times the coin, showing its muscle. The positive externalities it brings have further revitalized the Base ecosystem.

On the other hand, BSC has not made any noise even after the boots landed in this round. Where is the gap? This Thread will use this as a starting point to discuss and comment on the gap between the two CEXs on the chain in this round.

The reason why Coinbase pulled Aero is very simple. As shown in the figure below, in the past, projects incentivized DeFi miners directly. For example, for a project token worth $2, miners may get an additional $1 from the DEX transaction fee, for a total of $3.

Under the Ve(3,3) DEX system like Aero, this $3 is used to bribe veAero, and veAERO votes to distribute $Aero tokens (higher value, such as $9) to miners.

In the end, the project still paid $3, veAero (Aero lock-up) received $3 in real income, and the miners received $9 in incentives, which doubled the incentives.

The higher the price of Aero, the higher the incentive value issued, the higher the incentive that Base ecological projects can enjoy, and the fundamentals of ecological projects will also be strengthened. The value of the bribe tokens that can be given to Aero is also higher, and Aero's income is also higher, and the price is more optimistic about forming a flywheel.

In addition, if Base directly incentivizes on-chain projects, on the one hand, it is easy to become off-chain relationship building, and on the other hand, it is not easy to publicly incentivize those local dog and meme projects, and these projects have traffic. By supporting Aero, it is to achieve permissionless incentives for the on-chain ecosystem, because any project can further amplify the incentive effect through Aero. This approach brings benefits to ordinary developers that official incentives cannot match.

Looking back at BSC, are there similar products? Not only are there, but they can be said to be a level stronger than Base at the developer and product levels.

Thena can be regarded as an enhanced version of Aerodrome, supporting V3 centralized liquidity.

Pancake + Cakepie dual-wheel drive can play a stronger flywheel effect, and the ceiling is higher.

Although we complained that the Cake War organization was far inferior to the Pendle War (suspected of self-promotion), the subsequent iteration of Pancake was also slow, which delayed the completion of the flywheel. In addition, the ve(3,3) transaction fee was not learned from the advanced ve(3,3) to give the voter, but took a small half of the voting rights to intervene manually in the hands of the team (the taste of power, who is willing to let go).

However, in a horizontal comparison, although it is not as good as the top, it is more than enough than the bottom. For example, Camelot, the leader of ARB, has been calling for a year but still has not been on the voting gauge for voting allocation incentives.

The team capabilities of Cakepie/Magpie are very rare in BSC, and subDAOs on other chains are also very successful. Although Thena has not proven itself on other chains, its products are faster and better than those of Velo/Aero.

Since BSC has better products and developers, why didn't it get similar results to Base? Even Mantle's ve(3,3) DEX Moe can make some splashes in this round, but BSC can't?

As long as you do some research, you will be surprised to find that Binance's support for this is not zero but negative... It is negative...

Yes, on the one hand, the above projects did not receive investment and listing support like Aero, and on the other hand, as shown in the figure, the address marked as Binance and another suspected Binance address (inferred by the Cake community) have locked up 26% of veCAKE in total, directly competing with ecological projects. After all, the dividends and incentives in each round are limited. If Binance has more, the ecological projects will have less.

The Pancake team gets a small half of the voting rights, and Binance gets another small half, which greatly reduces the effect. Generally, this is injected into ecological projects for support. Here, Binance does not support the ecology but directly steals money from the ecology. Binance should not lack Pancake's income dividends...

ve(3,3) Is it difficult to understand? But in the last round, whether it was the Curve War between Yearn founded by AC and Convex, or Terra/Luna buying CVX to control Curve governance to support UST, they were all focus battles. This can be said to be basic common sense for senior Web3 players.

Pendle and Aero, the 100x coins in this round, also adopted this model, and even Cake relied on this to stop falling and rebound.

Did Binance use the resources invested in BSC to go to better projects? What is the difference between NFP/Cyber/ID/Hook, these BSC projects that have received investment + listing support, and Aero?

Apart from the quality of the projects that have long been complained about, these projects lack positive externalities and are relatively isolated. CB gave Aero one cent and turned it into three points of ecological incentives, while Binance's ten cents were directly wasted, and it is easy to form a reverse screening for developers.

In fact, the reverse screening is already in operation, and developers have begun to jump ship.

Thena team focused on IntentX, a new project of Base, and Magpie's new subDAO also focused on the ETH system. Although the subDAO's ultimate large block of revenue will flow back to MGP on BSC, how can the main DAO stay on a chain that lacks synergy with other new subDAOs for a long time?

To sum up, the main differences are

1. Coinbase focused its resources on projects that have positive externalities for the Base ecosystem, and spent three points of effect for one cent. Resources spent on high-quality developers continue to attract high-quality developers to join

2. Binance invested resources in BSC projects without positive externalities, and wasted ten cents. Instead, it did more harm than good for ecological projects with positive externalities, and it seemed that it did not understand web3, causing high-quality developers to jump ship.

This article only uses ve(3,3) DEX as an example, but the problems reflected are representative.

Base does not issue coins separately. BNB has outperformed the market recently due to frequent listings, but the rise in the price of this currency still depends on imagination. If the chain can be made more flexible, BNB's room for growth can be further opened. We will continue to evaluate and observe subsequent changes.

Original link

欢迎加入律动 BlockBeats 官方社群：

Telegram 订阅群： https://t.me/theblockbeats

Telegram 交流群： https://t.me/BlockBeats_App

Twitter 官方账号： https://twitter.com/BlockBeatsAsia