CryptoDoc

Crypto since ‘17 | I chase narratives before they trend | Alpha lives in quiet corners 🦅

[CryptoDoc @ElCryptoDoc]

If you’re entering the @arc trenches now that mainnet is live:

This is the bot I personally use to bridge and trade:

BasedBot → https://t.co/s3gT860lBx

I’m actively buying, researching and talking to teams across the ecosystem.

And the deeper I go, the more interesting setups I’m finding. 👀

I’ve accumulated more of two tiny low-cap reward plays → 100% of the tax goes back to holders, paid in $ARGUS on one and $XAUM on the other.

Both have public devs, tiny MCs and IMO serious potential if volume starts flowing.

I’ll share more on those soon.

[CryptoDoc @ElCryptoDoc]

@blockchain_goat @log1_053 The edge for people like us is we actually study what we buying into. It’s logical to do but many in the space ain’t doing that🧠

[CryptoDoc @ElCryptoDoc]

This is exactly the kind of detail that strengthens my thesis.

robinhood:0x000050e18ffa3f8f7ad170eb9cef160eb3ed1111 isn’t just trying to win through short-term attention.

The dev (@log1_053) is explaining how they moved creator fees OUT of the LP hook and directly into the token contract.

Meaning:

→ New pools can’t simply route around the fee
→ Creator revenue stays protected
→ Protocol revenue remains intact
→ Liquidity can grow without killing the flywheel

This is actually a VERY important detail if @Torchpaddotfun wants to become the dominant launchpad on Robinhood Chain. 👀

Very bullish design imo. 👀

[mlog @log1_053]

The community brought this screenshot to my attention yesterday, and I must say I’m happy someone took note.

Before we launched, I shared quite a bit of research showing that 9/10 EVM launchpads are actively losing creator fees due to flaws in Uniswap v4 hooks - or well, factually no flaws, just wrong use case (creatorfee).

With Torch, we tried to solve this through contract fees instead of hooks, and so far we’ve been proven right.

What matters here is that all other launchpads and the projects luanching are more or less losing their fees after about a month-ishh. That’s the point when the coins have grown enough for providing LP to become interesting.

It says something to me that this holder, who showed some pretty crazy conviction, is one of the few who actually researched this and understands it. I also know that a lot of this tech talk is yada yada for many people, which is fine. But for the sustainability of the project, these fees are absolutely necessary, if not the most important thing.

I’ll try to explain it in simple words. What is happening on other EVM launchpads is pretty straightforward:

> Creator fees go through a hook that sits on one LP pool.
> 3rd parties create a new LP pool, with no hook or with their own.
> LP and hook fees are generally 1%.
> A 3rd party sets up an LP pool with a 0.9% fee (or anything lower) and adds liquidity. Gets a lot of routes
> The project loses the creator fee, as the third party’s pool doesn’t have the projects hook.
>The launchpad loses its share of the creator fee revenue. Revenue declines, flywheel stops.

So with torch I tried to fix that on a few ways, i'll sum that up below;

We moved the fee out of the pool and into the token itself. The creator fee is enforced in the token contract, not in a hook and not in a specific pool. That changes the whole picture:

> The fee lives in the token, so it applies no matter which pool or router a trade goes through.
> A third party can create as many new LP pools as they want. The fee still applies, because the pool never decides whether it is charged.
> There is no hook for anyone to skip, so there is nothing to route around.
> The fee is only enforced on the buy side, and selling is never taxed by the token.
> Every pool also comes with a default 0.3% trading fee, which goes to liquidity providers. This 0.3% is a uniswap default on most pools, this encourages people to simply add to the canonical pool instead of a seperate one. It keeps the main pool attractive without it being PvP'd (pool v pool lol), so it keeps the most routes.

The torch fees, from both torch and the projects launched will, forever remain and can not be bypassed in the general sense.

Hope this clears up why I did it the way it is. Liquidity is king and that's why I wanted phat liquidity on torch.

All this is enough reason for all builders that are looking for a long term sustainability, to come over to torch and grow alongside it including the community without being afraid of their bread being taken by 3rd parties.

- mlog

[CryptoDoc @ElCryptoDoc]

@MrProducer281 @Torchpaddotfun In current market circumstances, you don’t sell the whole bag during corrections like this when the chart has shown nothing but strength.

HIGHER

[CryptoDoc @ElCryptoDoc]

@LyroFinance Bullish 🔥

[CryptoDoc @ElCryptoDoc]

@jos_crypto Agreed. The cooldown was healthy and needed. Smart capital usually positions during moves like this 👀

[CryptoDoc @ElCryptoDoc]

Hope some of y’all grabbed that local robinhood:0x000050e18ffa3f8f7ad170eb9cef160eb3ed1111 bottom with me yesterday. 🤝

$8M yesterday → $13M today.

If this is the start of another push, I expect $LYRO and robinhood:0x701d277984550745df2a53dcc15079cc1e2d1111 to wake up HARD too.

@Torchpaddotfun is slowly becoming one of the main reasons people are looking at Robinhood Chain again.

If the pad keeps pulling volume back in, the strongest ecosystem plays should benefit first.

You like seeing this too, right @vladtenev? 👀

[CryptoDoc @ElCryptoDoc]

@fantilussion Appreciate it bro 🤝 $LYRO looking strong here.

[CryptoDoc @ElCryptoDoc]

@cryptos_uni Well said, $TORCH 🥂

[CryptoDoc @ElCryptoDoc]

@CryptoDetonator @torchylabs @Torchpaddotfun @LyroFinance Solid bids 🫡

[CryptoDoc @ElCryptoDoc]

@zjnznz20266 @Torchpaddotfun $TORCHY 💹

[CryptoDoc @ElCryptoDoc]

Two plays I’m positioned in from @torchpaddotfun right now:

$LYRO - the first-mover utility play bringing fixed-rate BTC financing to RH Chain.

robinhood:0x701d277984550745df2a53dcc15079cc1e2d1111 - the #1 meme + mascot on the pad.

Completely different theses, but both make sense IF robinhood:0x000050e18ffa3f8f7ad170eb9cef160eb3ed1111 keeps growing.

With LYRO, the product thesis keeps getting stronger as the team just keeps SHIPPING. Go check @LyroFinance’s page and see what they’re building.

TORCHY is the obvious mascot meme of the ecosystem.

If the pad starts pushing again, I think BOTH can absolutely fly. 👀

[CryptoDoc @ElCryptoDoc]

@Probonoxyz @Torchpaddotfun Agreed. I think $LYRO has serious potential if they keep shipping the way they are. 👀

[CryptoDoc @ElCryptoDoc]

@yasu0x1 @Torchpaddotfun $LYRO but that’s also the more logical comparison.

It’s a utility play with an actual product, while $TORCHY is the mascot meme.

Completely different setups, so I’d expect LYRO to show stronger “execution” naturally. 🤝

[CryptoDoc @ElCryptoDoc]

@torchylabs @Torchpaddotfun Of course, the #1 mascot play on the pad deserves to be on the radar.🤝

[CryptoDoc @ElCryptoDoc]

@Hiraweb3 @Torchpaddotfun They really do, underrated alpha imo

[CryptoDoc @ElCryptoDoc]

@ThssoThsso1109 @log1_053 😁

[CryptoDoc @ElCryptoDoc]

@SebastianWols17 Some people don't understand this is super healthy and completely normal after such a run 😄

[CryptoDoc @ElCryptoDoc]

@kairo_market @ARCIRCLEonArc @arc Killing it🫡

[CryptoDoc @ElCryptoDoc]

@__spekulator__ @log1_053 Yep, exactly. The creator controls the payout wallet, while the actual fee split is fixed at launch.

So the fee itself can’t be routed around through another LP but wallet control obviously still matters.

[CryptoDoc @ElCryptoDoc]

@ReddBanksss @log1_053 Agreed. He clearly thought this through 🤝

[CryptoDoc @ElCryptoDoc]

@Therafeffect @log1_053 It’s possible 👀