I’ve been getting hammered with questions from funds and retail about Lighter over the past few weeks.
The token is down and Vlads tweets get aggressively shorted.
My read is Lighter is in a much better position than the price action suggests. The real issue is not a lack of product or talent, but a lack of transparency around tokenomics, financials, and MM deals. If Lighter leans into radical disclosure on where profits are flowing, how buybacks vs. growth spend are decided, and how incentives are structured, $LIT can become an “easy” asset to own and to underwrite, just like $HYPE was.
I want to talk about a few things:
- Why transparency matters and the “easy asset” framework
- What the team is building
- What they fumbled on and how to fix these issues
Why Transparency Matters
As I’ve mentioned before, I firmly believe that one of the reasons $HYPE did so well last year was because it was an “easy” asset to own and an “easy” asset to bring to IC, as an analyst you knew where most profits were flowing and as a PM it was an easy story to sell to your LPs (ie Mike Novogratz on CNBC and Bloomberg). The recent NYSE news points to where the industry is heading:
My read is that your odds as a business and therefore your token’s success is increasingly dependent on how/when/if you move toward being a digital security because these assets will have clearer value accrual, regulatory standing, and institutional legitimacy. Lighter, h
...