UNI (Uniswap) Investment Tips
Original | Liu Jiaolian
The light rain on Tianjie was as smooth as cake, but the grass was not visible from afar.
With BTC (Bitcoin) The size of the No. 6 pin was placed and the color of the multiple heads was tested. In this test, the bulls achieved excellent results, and basically achieved: how much did the bears throw out and how much the bulls ate. The bulls showed unlimited bullets and their tenacious will to defend their positions to the death. After reaching a previous high of 69k on March 5, it closed 66.7k on the 5th, 66.5k on the 6th, and 67.2k on the 7th. Looking at the closing price of the day, the bulls are still slowly moving upward.
UNI (Uniswap) After pulling 50% + in a single day on February 23, a decisive battle on the 24th, and holding on to the results, it once again surged over 20% on March 6, reaching a maximum of 17 shots. The 17 knife position is a rather delicate position. It's roughly equivalent to BTC's 30,000 dollar position. How to talk about it?
Looking back at the 2023.7.10 article “30,000 dollars, Bachmut for long and short”, you can see that the 30,000 dollar line is the key front for BTC's bull-bear transition: “Whether it's January 2021, the initial rebound of the bull market (first support), or the mid-term correction (second support) of the bull market from May to July 2021, or the last struggle at the end of the bull market in January 2022 (third support).”
When BTC passed through bulls and bears, went through wind and frost, raging horses, and broke 30,000 knives, it was already sounding the trumpet of charging to the previous high position of 69,000. (Liu Jiaochain 2023.4.11 “Bitcoin breaks 30,000 dollars, crossing the bullbear dividing line!”)
The key support level of the bull market reverses to a key resistance level after the bear market breaks; when recovering again, it must first break through and then reverse to the support level again, as a stepping stone for the backlash.
It's like a big river. If we cross the other side of the river, the river is our support; when the enemy attacks this bank, the river is our resistance.
At this moment, BTC has landed, and UNI has yet to cross the river.
Yesterday, March 8, the teaching chain discussed briefly the issue of UNI as “leverage” to outperform BTC in the “risk-free” method of outperforming BTC. For the UNI valuation matrix, you can also refer to the 2024.2.25 article “After the Uniswap team shipped $1 million at a high price...”.
In a situation where it was raised to $15-17 twice, $11.48 cost the $1 million Uniswap Labs team, reducing the possibility of “insider trading” accusations.
If it can work hard and make further efforts to cross the river, then it will run for the next resistance level of 30 dollars.
The higher up, the lighter the grip. Going from 20 to 30 is easier than going from 15 to 20. Breaking through the 30 resistance zone will also be easier than breaking through the 17 resistance zone. Note that the resistance zone is a range, not a specific point.
Crossing bulls and bears can also break through previous highs, which really proves that a coin is a value coin worth holding for a long time, rather than a junk coin that is going down in waves, cutting chives, and always falling to a new low. However, in the current market, 99.9% are junk coins. (Note: For new coins that only emerged after the bottom of 2022, don't believe in nonsense such as “breaking through the previous high”; they haven't actually surpassed the bulls and bears. For this kind of new currency, talking about “the previous high” is a deceptive ghost story.)
Then UNI, in the worst case scenario, degenerates into a meme coin (Meme). Any currency that becomes popular must have a meme component. Teach Chain mentioned this in the 3.6 teaching chain “One Day Bear Market Ends, UNI Rages 20% in the Day”. “Its “memes” are the same as SHIB's meme “Shiba Inu” and the BTC meme “e-gold.” UNI's meme is a “CEX killer” and “DeFi leader.”
The term meme is the term “story” (VCs want to see this story is not sexy), and the term for business school is “positioning” (Jack Trout, “Positioning — The Way of Competition in the Era of Homogenization),” when replaced by Internet web2, 1969).
For example, SHIB and DogeCoin are all positioned on the “Shiba Inu” segment. Their “stories” are all popular lists of Tesla CEO Elon Musk, the richest man in the world. According to Trout's theory, one track can accommodate up to two top players, such as Coca Cola and Pepsi, McDonald's and KFC, Apple phones and Android phones, etc. Being a junior is painful because people can't remember the third-place name (brand) at all. About SHIB, you can read the teachchain 2021.5.12 article “SHIB's Success, Can't You Learn” to understand the background of its rise back then.
However, there is a more extreme situation than Lauter's Top 2. That is, the boss has a powerful black hole effect, and any competitor close to it will be sucked up all matter and information by strong gravity. Well, on this track, or under this “meme” label, there will only be an absolute head, and the second one is a running seat. He comes and goes in a hurry, and people are simply too lazy to remember it. A typical example is BTC (Bitcoin).
Under the “meme” label of electronic gold, BTC is the eternal winner on the segmented circuit of value storage, and when you sing the fighter, I can't help but drop by. Their attack will only enhance and enhance the value of BTC and further strengthen BTC's dominant position. In the end, they were unable to hold any position, and soon they sadly withdrew from the historical stage, which is unknown.
What we know is that Uniswap — when we talk about Uniswap rather than Uniswap Labs, we mean smart contracts or “protocols” (protocols) on the chain that are not controlled by Uniswap Labs — is a well-deserved “brother” of DEX decentralized trading agreements from its inception in 2008 until March 8, 2024, when it was published in Japanese; it is an absolute leader in terms of orthodoxy, technical transparency, business volume, and industry consensus.
As to whether Uniswap has a strong black hole effect, then it is impossible to make a judgment. However, at least, in the 2020 DeFi Summer, since strong competitors and imitators appeared on the DEX circuit, Sushiswap, PancakeSwap, and even SWAPs on various copycat chains have sprung up endlessly. Some have also briefly “surpassed” Uniswap in terms of certain KPI indicators such as TVL and trading volume through strong operating methods such as order swapping, promotion, diversion, and jerking. However, people aren't stupid; plastic surgery beauty and natural beauty; most people can tell the difference.
Clear water comes out of hibiscus, and naturally carvings are removed.
Memes memes are a factor that can be imitated. However, if imitation comes and goes, it is also easy to get the result of Xuebu in Handan and Dongshi Xiaoxiao. Instead, it is laughable and generous.
From a meme coin perspective alone, UNI is eligible. Its game structure is as simple and pure as SHIB. ERC-20, no owner contract, creates a total of 1 billion dollars, and no one can change it. One more lost design is that after 4 years of creation, inflation was constant at 2% per year. It was also written in the contract code, and the chain is completely open and transparent, so no one can tamper with it. (Refer to Education Chain's 2020.11.7 article “Uniswap (UNI) Valuation Analysis and Investment Plan”)
Other than the coin holder, the only external control of the token contract is minter. It's a Timelock contract. The Timelock contract, on the other hand, is controlled by the Governance (Governance) contract. This means that governance can only trigger 2% of coin minting actions, and no other parameters can be changed — that is, no one can change the game structure.
Here's a screenshot of the on-chain contract code snippet (physical proof — blockchain idea: don't believe it, verify it!) ：
Full code:https://etherscan.io/token/0x1f9840a85d5aF5bf1D1762F925BDADdC4201F984#code
Don't you know what kind of door you can see in the code?
The code reveals a question that probably many people are unaware of: From when until when was the 4-year release in the UNI token economic model?
You might think it's the first year from September 2020 to September 2021, two years until September 2022, three years until September 2023, and the fourth year of September 2024.
The graph given on the Uniswap Labs blog also looks like this:
However, in fact, at the physical level, the contract code does not hard restrict this. Also, judging from the parameter settings, the time stamp for starting the 2% increase distribution is set at 0:00 on January 1, 2024 instead of September 2024.
Therefore, you can look at this four-year period from a different perspective: 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, four years. In 2024, the game structure was fully developed and became a complete meme logic.
Don't get bogged down with what meme coins call a “fair launch.” Whether it's SHIB's very early acquisition of information and a lot of cheap purchases, or Ordi (BRC-20)'s very early free (only paying a small amount of gas fee) mass casting, it's essentially different from directly publicly slicing a piece of cake to a team that has already paid ahead of time and developed a product.
It's just that during the development process, market pricing will be distorted to a certain extent. Once it is fully developed, it will enter the stage of equal play.
Certainty (predictability, predictability) is invaluable.
The total amount of UNI's creation and post-creation inflation rate are both physically immutable and unmanageable. Just like the maximum amount of BTC and the issuance rate, it is impossible for a BTC holder to make forced changes by voting with a single vote. Governance itself is a kind of coercive power, a kind of power. The power of one person, and the power of a group of people, are all powerful powers; essentially, they are no different. Using “decentralized” unowned code to restrain power is the essence of blockchain governance.
At this point, both UNI and SHIB are doing better than ETH (Ethereum). The Ethereum Foundation, and even Vitalik, have changed the Ethereum hard fork strategy too many times in the past, which seriously hurt the predictability of the ETH economic model. The introduction of the burning model of ETH further brought this problem into the swamp of chaos. So much so that if people don't search online, they simply can't draw a clear picture in their minds. What time, how much is its circulation volume, how much is the increase in circulation, let alone depict it using a simple and beautiful equal-ratio sum formula like BTC.
The design and implementation of the Uniswap protocol is better than the current second-tier (L2) and many public chains. The good news is that the agreement is completely out of control of the team, leaving only one fee switch to governance control. Today, almost all L2 asset control is under an upgradable contract controlled by the team. It's a complicated trust model. However, many public chains can often change core parameters at will (under whatever name). For example, EOS has just announced that it will stop issuing more and lower the inflation rate. Whether the original intention and purpose of the team or actual controller is doing things is good or bad, this kind of combined control is not a good thing; it is a disaster.
There is no need for trust, to what extent it can be achieved is a litmus test for the success of a Web3 project.
(Official account: Liu Jiaolin. (Knowledge Planet: Reply to “Planet” on the official account)
(Disclaimer: Nothing in this article constitutes investment advice. Cryptocurrency is an extremely risky breed, and there is a risk that it will return to zero at any time, so please participate carefully and be responsible for yourself.)
