I woke up this morning and came across CZ's tweet about whether "Building" can make money, and I want to share my thoughts on this matter.

First: Can Building make money at this stage?

I can responsibly tell you that the opportunities to make money purely from Building are very, very few, and the money made from Building is mostly from other people who are also Building. Think about it carefully; isn't that the case?

What does Build mean? I believe everyone knows it refers to construction, whether it's a community or consensus that needs to be built. This term is not wrong; after all, Bitcoin was built through Building. However, in recent years, the meaning of Build has gradually changed. The terms Build and Hold were highly correlated in the past, but now Build is highly correlated with "pouring in."

This is because early cryptocurrencies or those that can develop have a core essence that is difficult to replicate and tamper with. For example, let's talk about the top five tokens by market capitalization in the cryptocurrency space:

1. $BTC essentially promotes decentralization, censorship resistance, and immutability.
2. $ETH essentially represents a programmable blockchain, allowing programming based on a trustless network.
3. $USDT essentially serves as the monetary base of the crypto market, pegged to the US dollar as a compensatory asset.
4. $XRP essentially acts as a neutral settlement bridge asset, designed as a bridge currency for cross-border payment systems for financial institutions.
5. $BNB essentially leverages #Binance's profitability at the user level.

They all seem attractive, but in reality, there are significant differences. Bitcoin has achieved blockchain and cryptocurrency, while Ethereum has achieved smart contracts. These two are completely decentralized products. Even if Satoshi Nakamoto never revealed himself, and even if Vitalik Buterin is currently facing a lot of criticism, it does not change this essence.

If USDT is exposed for not having enough collateral assets, if it is revealed to be suppressed by world powers, or if US Treasury bonds collapse, the value of USDT is subject to too much centralized interference.

XRP is even more so; a lawsuit from the SEC can cause XRP to suffer for two years, and it is only because of the conclusion of the lawsuit with the SEC that it can return to its peak.

BNB is essentially based on user trust in Binance, and while BNB also provides a wealth effect as a golden shovel, Binance is ultimately a centralized company, and the pressure it faces may not be less than that faced by XRP and USDT, and may even be more significant.

Therefore, let's not talk about anything else; among the top five, only Building Bitcoin and Ethereum has a greater opportunity, while Building the other tokens faces more external interference. Even if they are built better, they may still be attacked by centralized powers. Moreover, the current Build does not equal Hold; it is more about recruiting others to buy in.

Over 99.99% of tokens are like this. Why is it so difficult to continue rising after reaching a certain market cap? Because the story is no longer attractive, or people have little expectation for future market cap increases. Is this because there is no Build? I think quite the opposite; it is because it has reached a threshold of liquidity. In simple terms, it means Build has reached its limit.

Of course, there are examples of rebounds after falling from high positions, and that is true, but most of these are not driven by Build. They are more often event-driven or capital-driven. There are indeed cases where "Building" drives a return to the peak, but they are too few.

This is because, during the Building process, the number of holders is gradually decreasing. If this problem cannot be solved, Building becomes pouring in.

I have seen too many communities, and too many Builds ultimately succeed in transitioning from Build to "wealthy individuals," with only a few large holders. Your Build may just be someone else's exit liquidity.

Second: Can Building make money at this stage? (Yes)

I can responsibly tell you that while you cannot make money purely from Build, if you Build in the right track and Hold the right assets, there is an opportunity.

Building does not necessarily mean building a project or a token; it can represent an industry, a track, or a narrative. If you Build for the industry, track, and narrative, I believe the opportunity to make money is significant because it reflects your understanding of the industry, track, and narrative. If you understand it, while you cannot say there is a 100% chance of making money, the probability of making money is definitely not just based on luck.

Earlier realization of price discovery is a reward from the market to Builders.

True Building is no longer about blindly posting MLM ads on Twitter or being all-in with faith; it is about supplementing the industry, track, and narrative.

And Holding cannot be mindless; it must be based on sufficient understanding. What you Hold is not just your dream; you also need to see how many others share the same dream, how much they hold, and whether they are genuinely working for the dream or just working to harvest you.

This tweet is sponsored by @ApeXProtocolCN | Dex With ApeX

免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。