社区主导的代币发行的兴起：挑战传统的VC主导模式

社区主导的代币发行再次上升，这种趋势挑战了由机构投资者主导的传统模式。为了分析这一变化，我们将探讨最近的趋势，包括超流动和回声的案例，同时评估不同令牌分布方法的社区情绪和市场表现。

A new wave of community-led token issuance is sweeping the crypto industry, challenging the traditional model dominated by venture capital (VC) and other institutional investors.

由社区主导的代币发行浪潮正在席卷加密货币行业，挑战了由风险投资（VC）和其他机构投资者主导的传统模式。

In recent months, several key factors have contributed to this resurgence of community-driven fundraising.

最近几个月，几个关键因素促成了社区驱动筹款活动的复兴。

First, market sentiment has gradually shifted toward a preference for community-led issuance models, largely influenced by the successful performance of Hyperliquid’s tokens after distribution.

首先，市场情绪逐渐转向偏爱社区主导的发行模型，这在很大程度上受到了分发后超流动令的成功性能的影响。

This positive sentiment stems from the observation that tokens allocated to the community have generally performed better post-issuance compared to those allocated to VCs and other large investors.

这种积极的情绪源于与分配给VCS和其他大型投资者相比，分配给社区的代币通常表现更好。

In the past, tokens allocated to VCs often performed poorly after issuance due to a combination of factors, including low circulation, uneven token distribution, and strict token unlocking schedules, which led to continuous price declines over time.

过去，分配给VCS的令牌在发行后经常表现不佳，这是由于多种因素的组合，包括低流通，不均匀的令牌分布和严格的令牌解锁计划，这会随着时间的推移持续下降。

In contrast, tokens allocated to the community have typically encountered less selling pressure and have even appreciated in value post-issuance.

相比之下，分配给社区的代币通常遇到的销售压力较小，甚至在发行后的价值上都赞赏。

This disparity in performance has created a growing preference among users for projects that allocate a larger portion of their tokens to the community.

性能差异使用户越来越偏好，这些项目将其代币的大部分代币分配给社区。

Second, as more new tokens enter the market, projects need to find ways to stand out from the competition. Community participation is becoming a key differentiator in this regard.

其次，随着越来越多的新代币进入市场，项目需要找到在竞争中脱颖而出的方法。在这方面，社区参与成为关键的区别。

The “fair launch model,” which involves launching a token without any pre-allocation or fundraising, has returned to people’s attention as a way to achieve fairer token distribution.

“公平发射模型”涉及在没有任何前分配或筹款的情况下启动令牌，它重新引起人们的注意，以实现更公平的令牌分配。

This model has gained popularity among retail investors, who are now able to participate in investment projects that were previously limited to institutional investors.

该模式已经在散户投资者中广受欢迎，他们现在能够参与以前仅限于机构投资者的投资项目。

In some cases, the community-led model even allows retail investors to acquire tokens at a better price than traditional investors.

在某些情况下，社区主导的模式甚至允许散户投资者以比传统投资者更好的价格购买代币。

However, this trend also presents new challenges, particularly for project teams that must maintain fairness in token distribution while securing the necessary funding.

但是，这种趋势也提出了新的挑战，特别是对于必须在确保必要资金的同时保持代币分配中公平性的项目团队。

While many founders value democratic participation in their communities, they often face a more practical problem: how to raise enough money to complete product development.

尽管许多创始人重视民主党在社区中的参与，但他们经常面临一个更实用的问题：如何筹集足够的资金来完成产品开发。

The dilemma arises because projects that allocate the majority of their tokens to VCs and other institutional investors often face skepticism from users, who may prefer projects that allocate a larger portion of tokens to the community.

出现困境是因为将大部分令牌分配给VCS和其他机构投资者经常面临用户的持怀疑态度的项目，这些项目可能更喜欢将大部分代币分配给社区的项目。

Even so, the community-led model still has unique advantages.

即便如此，社区主导的模型仍然具有独特的优势。

If the token distribution structure is overly dependent on institutional investors, it will often lead to a mismatch between short-term price fluctuations and the long-term strategic goals of the project.

如果令牌分配结构过于依赖机构投资者，则通常会导致短期价格波动与项目的长期战略目标之间的不匹配。

This problem is usually manifested through a strict token unlocking mechanism, which further affects the healthy development of token economics.

通常通过严格的令牌解锁机制来表现此问题，这进一步影响了令牌经济学的健康发展。

In addition, excessive control by institutional investors will also weaken the voice of retail investors in project governance and long-term development.

此外，机构投资者的过度控制也将削弱散户投资者在项目治理和长期发展方面的声音。

This lack of participation may lead to a decline in community activity and ultimately a loss of investor interest and attention.

缺乏参与可能会导致社区活动的下降，并最终导致投资者的兴趣和关注。

Common pain points

常见的疼痛点

Community Preferences: What do users care about most?

社区偏好：用户最关心什么？

Discussions on social media and the rise of platforms like Echo show growing frustration among cryptocurrency users about the special treatment given to VCs and institutional investors.

关于社交媒体的讨论以及Echo等平台的兴起表明，加密货币使用者对VCS和机构投资者的特殊待遇越来越沮丧。

There is a growing community call for a fairer investment environment.

社区越来越多地呼吁建立更公平的投资环境。

Main expectations of the communityStructural considerations

社区结构考虑的主要期望

Changing trends: impact on the market

变化趋势：对市场的影响

As more projects adopt a community-centric strategy, some key trends emerge:

随着越来越多的项目采用以社区为中心的战略，一些关键趋势出现了：

Innovative token issuance mechanism

创新的令牌发行机制

Main challenges faced by the project

该项目面临的主要挑战

Case Study: Hyperliquid’s VC-free Model

案例研究：超流动的无VC模型

The successful performance of Hyperliquid’s tokens after distribution provides a reference for rejecting traditional venture capital financing.

分销后超流动的代币的成功性能为拒绝传统风险投资融资提供了参考。

However, Hyperliquid’s user base has some unique characteristics that make it different from other projects attempting similar community-driven approaches, and therefore may not be suitable as a general reference case:

但是，Hyperliquid的用户群具有一些独特的特征，使其与尝试类似社区驱动方法的其他项目不同，因此可能不适合作为一般参考案例：

While Hyperliquid’s approach has been remarkably successful, other projects need to realize that their communities may differ greatly from Hyperliquid’s.

尽管Hyperliquid的方法非常成功，但其他项目需要意识到其社区可能与超级流动性有很大差异。

A strategy that works for a platform with many wealthy and experienced traders may not work for a project targeting the average retail user.

适用于许多富有且经验丰富的交易者平台的策略可能对针对普通零售用户的项目不起作用。

This also raises a question worth pondering: Is community fundraising really more sustainable, or does it simply transfer selling pressure from venture capital to retail investors who are more eager for quick returns?

这也提出了一个值得思考的问题：社区筹款是真的更可持续，还是只是将销售压力从风险投资转移到更渴望快速回报的零售投资者？

Venture capital usually adopts a well-thought-out exit strategy, while retail investors in community fundraising lack the ability to invest long-term due to limited funds, which may lead to more unstable markets and emotional fluctuations.

风险投资通常采用经过深思熟虑的退出策略，而社区筹款活动的散户投资者由于资金有限而无法进行长期投资的能力，这可能会导致更不稳定的市场和情感上的波动。

Additionally, it’s worth noting that despite Hyperliquid distributing over 31% of their tokens, they have remained focused on building a quality product that users will actually want to use.

此外，值得注意的是，尽管超过31％的令牌分发了超过31％的令牌，但他们仍然专注于构建用户实际想要使用的优质产品。

This provides an important revelation to other projects: the community itself cannot ensure the success of a project, and the project must be built on a solid foundation, such as providing an excellent product experience.

这为其他项目提供了重要的启示：社区本身无法确保项目的成功，并且该项目必须建立在坚实的基础上，例如提供出色的产品体验。

Key differences between the methods

方法之间的关键差异

Although the crypto community has enthusiastically embraced the shift from a venture capital-led fundraising model to a community-driven model, one fact that cannot be ignored is that the short-term profit-seeking tendency in human nature has not changed.

尽管加密社区热情地接受了从风险投资的筹款模式到社区驱动的模式的转变，但不能忽视的一个事实是，人性的短期寻求利润趋势并没有改变。

The key differences between these allocation methods are as follows

这些分配方法之间的关键差异如下