A Brief Discussion on the Web3 Social Track

Friend Tech is a social application that once became very popular during this bear market. When the project launched, it attracted a large number of users thanks to the backing of heavyweight venture capital firm Paradigm and the participation of many KOLs.

The main gameplay of this project is to tokenize the personal value of KOLs and allow users to interact with KOLs through paid group memberships. In this interaction process, users gain value from KOLs, while KOLs receive corresponding rewards.

Regarding this project, I recall expressing the following viewpoint in articles or online discussions:

Similar ideas were practiced by projects during the ICO boom in 2017, but ultimately failed. The main reason is that KOLs, whose personal value was tokenized, could not rigidly fulfill their promises, making it difficult to provide real services and value to users who paid the price.

Additionally, the transformation of KOL value has already matured in mobile internet applications. Although the platform's cut is quite high in the internet model, I still feel that this does not necessarily require blockchain technology.

For these reasons, I have never participated in Friend Tech.

When Friend Tech first launched, many articles discussed the project's economic model in detail, focusing on how users could profit from buying and selling the project's tokens from an economic model perspective.

This is a trend among many current crypto projects, but I have always believed that while a truly successful crypto project needs a good economic model, it is certainly not the core part; the core part must meet certain essential needs in the ecosystem or solve some persistent issues within it.

Overemphasizing the economic model often leads to speculative demand rather than genuine user demand. In the crypto ecosystem, speculative demand is generally closely related to the price of the project’s tokens. Currently, the vast majority of tokens in the crypto ecosystem do not have profit-generating capabilities, so their prices are often driven by emotions. And emotions can come quickly and leave just as fast; once they cannot be sustained, a collapse can happen in an instant.

I believe this is also an important reason why many projects (including Friend Tech) ultimately cannot continue.

Since the social field where Friend Tech operates has always been a highly关注ed track, the changes in Friend Tech have also prompted reflections on the social track.

In an online discussion last weekend, I shared some thoughts on Web 3 social:

I still have some doubts about whether the Web 3 social we expect might be a false demand? Or perhaps the true Web 3 social is not at all the model we can imagine now?

Following this line of thought, reflecting again, the reason Facaster was very popular a few months ago was not because its model was special, but because a small group of celebrities in the crypto ecosystem came together to create a network effect.

If this small group of celebrities had used a traditional mobile internet app instead of Facaster, I estimate that app could also become popular in the crypto ecosystem.

So does Facaster really need blockchain?

I hope my thoughts are wrong.

According to relevant information, the Friend Tech team has profited about $40 million from this project. I do not know the actual number of team members or their monthly expenses. However, based on the general situation of crypto projects, if they are not spending recklessly, $40 million should be enough to sustain the project since its launch last year.

For a team genuinely committed to building in this ecosystem, I believe they can still take a chance and explore other paths.

Recently, there were reports that the project team is preparing to build a social chain. Although I hold a cautious attitude towards this idea, at least it is an attempt and effort, which is certainly better than giving up and leaving.

This project has only been online for about a year, and many projects in the crypto ecosystem are in even more difficult situations and have been around for longer, yet they are still persevering and enduring.

Often, as long as a project can last until the end and survive, the hope for victory is much greater, and the chances of success are also much higher.

From the former glory of Friend Tech to its current desolation, there are many aspects worth observing and reflecting on. Although this process is lamentable, it is also an essential and normal phenomenon in the development of the ecosystem.

We do not need to be pessimistic about the future of the ecosystem because of this.