fast

BD at @doubletop_io / Web3 Market Entry & Unit Economics (CEE Focus) / Research on crypto business mechanics.

[fast @fastmvm]

Over the last year, crypto consumer apps have become much more real. Some are not only reaching large user bases, but also generating organic revenue. Polymarket and Hyperliquid are two obvious examples.

That matters because it shows crypto consumer products are not inherently impossible to build. But it also makes one thing clearer: many teams still misunderstand what actually drives retention in consumer apps.

• A simple framework:
Repeated utility × low friction × trust = the foundation of retention

Users come back when a product helps them solve a clear problem, does it with little friction, and feels trustworthy enough to use again.

• A lot of crypto teams confuse subsidized activity with retention.

Airdrops and incentives can drive registrations, wallet activity, volume, and TVL. But that does not automatically mean users found lasting value or built the product into their normal behavior.

• Another common mistake is selling “crypto” instead of the actual job-to-be-done.

Most users do not care about being onchain. They care about outcomes: sending money, trading, earning yield, accessing something, participating in a market, or interacting financially in a useful way.

If your value proposition sounds like “decentralized, permissionless, composable” instead of a concrete user benefit, mass consumer retention is unlikely to emerge.

People come for outcomes, not architecture.

• UX is also much more important than many crypto teams treat it.

In crypto, bad UX is not just annoying. It feels risky. Users deal with money, signatures, fees, networks, and often irreversible actions. So friction damages not only conversion, but also trust and repeat usage.

• Another major mistake is building around behavior that rarely repeats.

A product can still have demand and even monetize well, but retention depends on whether users have a natural reason to come back within a visible future horizon. Retention is not about whether users liked it. It is about whether they need it again.

• Teams also often try to teach users crypto instead of hiding complexity.

For consumer apps, that is usually the wrong approach. The more chains, gas, bridge logic, and signing semantics a user has to understand, the higher the cognitive load and the lower the likelihood of continued usage.

• A related problem: many products make their value legible only to crypto-native users.

A product may be objectively strong, but if only people with a developed crypto mental model can quickly understand why it is useful, mass consumer retention will stay limited.

• Trust is another area where teams get it wrong.

Many think trust comes after growth. In consumer finance, that logic is weak. Trust has to be designed in from the start through transparency, clear flows, understandable fees, recovery options, predictability, and readable UX.

• So what should builders do instead?

- Measure organic usage separately from reward-driven activity.
- Build strong onboarding and wallet flows early.
- Abstract away unnecessary complexity.
- Design around behaviors that already repeat.
- Make value understandable within minutes.
- Treat trust as part of the product, not as a later marketing layer.

• The main idea is simple:

Users do not come back because a product is crypto. They come back because it helps them achieve a clear outcome in a simple and trustworthy way.

The best crypto consumer apps will not ask users to adapt to crypto. They will use crypto to improve behaviors users already have.

• You can read full article with the explanations and framework in my Substack: link in reply

[fast @fastmvm]

@0xFleck Good takes!
And there is a chance that some of the retail users will move from PM to HL markets through UI apps which will make it simple for mass consumer.

[fast @fastmvm]

Working on a series for crypto operators on entering the CEE market.

The core mistake many teams make is assuming that what works in Western markets will be just as efficient in CEE. In many cases, it won’t.

Planning to publish Part 1 next week.

[fast @fastmvm]

100% agree. Polymarket is a business which needs to have healthy business model, fees is the most healthy way to monetize their business.

I'm sure that revenue they will generate could result in the better token valuation, especially if they do token buybacks

And all of the haters will be happy in the end talking about how much money Polymarket is earning.

[fast @fastmvm]

@tafcirmaj Congrats! Great product!

[fast @fastmvm]

@DefiIgnas Yep, really sad that they haven't implemented any option for existing users to become someone referrals. Or just to move referrals from previous system to new one.

[fast @fastmvm]

@fintechfrank At this point it looks more like a market structure shift than a temporary narrative. What is interesting is that a big % of this OI is on HL. That shows that a big % of 15B OI is not just a drop hunters.

[fast @fastmvm]

Good take. Every generation monetizes the newest source of attention, leverage or arbitrage. But history usually remembers the few things each generation built that were actually durable, not just the hustle formats that were most visible at the time.

[Stacy Muur @stacy_muur]

Core business by generation:

Boomers:
• Real estate seminars
• Timeshare presentations
• "I know a guy" consulting
• Golf course deals

Gen X:
• MLM (the OG grind)
• Forex trading courses
• Domain flipping
• AdSense blogging

Millennials:
• Crypto startups (ideate → raise → TGE → repeat)
• Dropshipping empires
• Amazon FBA
• Selling courses on how to sell courses
• "I help founders scale" Twitter bios

Gen Z:
• Memecoins
• Clip farming
• UGC content mills
• TikTok live selling
• Roblox startups
• Prompt packs and custom GPT workflows
• Notion templates as a personality

Gen Alpha:
• iPad kid to AI agent founder pipeline
• Selling Fortnite maps
• VR world-building gigs
• AI-generated kidfluencer channels
• We're not ready for what they're cooking (probably neural link side hustles by age 10)

Same energy every generation. Just different platforms and slightly worse attention spans.

[fast @fastmvm]

@Lukexiao0 @BNBCHAIN Hey! Congrats on new role!

[fast @fastmvm]

A lot of crypto consumer products still assume the user should adapt to the system.
The better model is the opposite: the system should adapt to the user.

[fast @fastmvm]

@tradewithonyx Great decision to reward early users!

[fast @fastmvm]

@j0hnwang ideas are good, but good question is will be there enough of lqv for miners to execute hedge

[fast @fastmvm]

Trying to close one hole often opens another.

In Ethena in bull market for sure you can earn great yields, but in bear when yields 4-5%, you can switch to USDtb to earn RWA "safe" yield.

But good question is it better to earn this yield with Ethena or with direct exposure, if you're able to do that.

[fast @fastmvm]

In my latest research, I wrote about why points farming campaigns should be divided into seasons.

Because it just makes it much easier to understand whether your activity is actually organic or just driven by incentives.

Hyperliquid is a great example:

Their very first season ended in early May 2024, and the new season was only announced at the end of May.

People didn't know what would happen next with the pts campaign, and many weren't expecting retroactive pts rewards.

Even so, Hyperliquid perp volume spiked twice during May 2024 to around $4.5-5B. Which is also quite significant, but still impressive to see.

That gave the founders a much clearer view of whether there was still real organic usage in the product.

[fast @fastmvm]

Over the last year, crypto consumer apps have become much more real. Some are not only reaching large user bases, but also generating organic revenue. Polymarket and Hyperliquid are two obvious examples.

That matters because it shows crypto consumer products are not inherently impossible to build. But it also makes one thing clearer: many teams still misunderstand what actually drives retention in consumer apps.

• A simple framework:
Repeated utility × low friction × trust = the foundation of retention

Users come back when a product helps them solve a clear problem, does it with little friction, and feels trustworthy enough to use again.

• A lot of crypto teams confuse subsidized activity with retention.

Airdrops and incentives can drive registrations, wallet activity, volume, and TVL. But that does not automatically mean users found lasting value or built the product into their normal behavior.

• Another common mistake is selling “crypto” instead of the actual job-to-be-done.

Most users do not care about being onchain. They care about outcomes: sending money, trading, earning yield, accessing something, participating in a market, or interacting financially in a useful way.

If your value proposition sounds like “decentralized, permissionless, composable” instead of a concrete user benefit, mass consumer retention is unlikely to emerge.

People come for outcomes, not architecture.

• UX is also much more important than many crypto teams treat it.

In crypto, bad UX is not just annoying. It feels risky. Users deal with money, signatures, fees, networks, and often irreversible actions. So friction damages not only conversion, but also trust and repeat usage.

• Another major mistake is building around behavior that rarely repeats.

A product can still have demand and even monetize well, but retention depends on whether users have a natural reason to come back within a visible future horizon. Retention is not about whether users liked it. It is about whether they need it again.

• Teams also often try to teach users crypto instead of hiding complexity.

For consumer apps, that is usually the wrong approach. The more chains, gas, bridge logic, and signing semantics a user has to understand, the higher the cognitive load and the lower the likelihood of continued usage.

• A related problem: many products make their value legible only to crypto-native users.

A product may be objectively strong, but if only people with a developed crypto mental model can quickly understand why it is useful, mass consumer retention will stay limited.

• Trust is another area where teams get it wrong.

Many think trust comes after growth. In consumer finance, that logic is weak. Trust has to be designed in from the start through transparency, clear flows, understandable fees, recovery options, predictability, and readable UX.

• So what should builders do instead?

- Measure organic usage separately from reward-driven activity.
- Build strong onboarding and wallet flows early.
- Abstract away unnecessary complexity.
- Design around behaviors that already repeat.
- Make value understandable within minutes.
- Treat trust as part of the product, not as a later marketing layer.

• The main idea is simple:

Users do not come back because a product is crypto. They come back because it helps them achieve a clear outcome in a simple and trustworthy way.

The best crypto consumer apps will not ask users to adapt to crypto. They will use crypto to improve behaviors users already have.

• You can read full article with the explanations and framework in my Substack: link in reply

[fast @fastmvm]

@Flowslikeosmo For sure if that value exist

[fast @fastmvm]

Good point. If teams want fewer users to dump drop tokens, then need to structure the airdrop around actions that help users experience real product value. Once users see that value firsthand, they are more likely to believe in the narrative and less likely to view the token as just another asset to get rid of immediately.

[fast @fastmvm]

@mattgurbiel totally agree on this, good BD need to understand the pain of the client

[fast @fastmvm]

Many crypto consumer apps can buy activity, but cannot build repeat behavior. That is the real gap.

Retention usually breaks when the product does not create repeated utility, still feels too hard to use, or does not feel trustworthy enough.

[fast @fastmvm]

@GREEND0TS Good point, but it’s also important not to over-promote the founder, so the whole company brand and campaign don’t end up resting on a single name.

[fast @fastmvm]

@_Anchor_Point_ If they keep building the product the way they have so far, the probability is not small.

[fast @fastmvm]

Over the last year, crypto consumer apps have become much more real. Some are not only reaching large user bases, but also generating organic revenue. Polymarket and Hyperliquid are two obvious examples.

That matters because it shows crypto consumer products are not inherently impossible to build. But it also makes one thing clearer: many teams still misunderstand what actually drives retention in consumer apps.

• A simple framework:
Repeated utility × low friction × trust = the foundation of retention

Users come back when a product helps them solve a clear problem, does it with little friction, and feels trustworthy enough to use again.

• A lot of crypto teams confuse subsidized activity with retention.

Airdrops and incentives can drive registrations, wallet activity, volume, and TVL. But that does not automatically mean users found lasting value or built the product into their normal behavior.

• Another common mistake is selling “crypto” instead of the actual job-to-be-done.

Most users do not care about being onchain. They care about outcomes: sending money, trading, earning yield, accessing something, participating in a market, or interacting financially in a useful way.

If your value proposition sounds like “decentralized, permissionless, composable” instead of a concrete user benefit, mass consumer retention is unlikely to emerge.

People come for outcomes, not architecture.

• UX is also much more important than many crypto teams treat it.

In crypto, bad UX is not just annoying. It feels risky. Users deal with money, signatures, fees, networks, and often irreversible actions. So friction damages not only conversion, but also trust and repeat usage.

• Another major mistake is building around behavior that rarely repeats.

A product can still have demand and even monetize well, but retention depends on whether users have a natural reason to come back within a visible future horizon. Retention is not about whether users liked it. It is about whether they need it again.

• Teams also often try to teach users crypto instead of hiding complexity.

For consumer apps, that is usually the wrong approach. The more chains, gas, bridge logic, and signing semantics a user has to understand, the higher the cognitive load and the lower the likelihood of continued usage.

• A related problem: many products make their value legible only to crypto-native users.

A product may be objectively strong, but if only people with a developed crypto mental model can quickly understand why it is useful, mass consumer retention will stay limited.

• Trust is another area where teams get it wrong.

Many think trust comes after growth. In consumer finance, that logic is weak. Trust has to be designed in from the start through transparency, clear flows, understandable fees, recovery options, predictability, and readable UX.

• So what should builders do instead?

- Measure organic usage separately from reward-driven activity.
- Build strong onboarding and wallet flows early.
- Abstract away unnecessary complexity.
- Design around behaviors that already repeat.
- Make value understandable within minutes.
- Treat trust as part of the product, not as a later marketing layer.

• The main idea is simple:

Users do not come back because a product is crypto. They come back because it helps them achieve a clear outcome in a simple and trustworthy way.

The best crypto consumer apps will not ask users to adapt to crypto. They will use crypto to improve behaviors users already have.

• You can read full article with the explanations and framework in my Substack: link in reply

[fast @fastmvm]

Full article on Substack: https://t.co/IUzXlB3e3i