🚀 Gate Square “Gate Fun Token Challenge” is Live!
Create tokens, engage, and earn — including trading fee rebates, graduation bonuses, and a $1,000 prize pool!
Join Now 👉 https://www.gate.com/campaigns/3145
💡 How to Participate:
1️⃣ Create Tokens: One-click token launch in [Square - Post]. Promote, grow your community, and earn rewards.
2️⃣ Engage: Post, like, comment, and share in token community to earn!
📦 Rewards Overview:
Creator Graduation Bonus: 50 GT
Trading Fee Rebate: The more trades, the more you earn
Token Creator Pool: Up to $50 USDT per user + $5 USDT for the first 50 launche
Everyone is focused on how much Lock-up Position and new users RWA can bring to Injective. But there's a more pressing question: when those trillion-level traditional capital really comes in the form of Tokens, do they really want the "encryption Alpha" that we are playing with?
The answer may be disappointing - it's simply not the case. The liquidity brought by these financial giants is completely different from what is currently in the market. They don't care about the myth of MEME coins multiplying by a hundred times, nor are they interested in leveraged mining. Their demands are simple and straightforward: returns within a compliant framework, reliable collateral, and a frictionless trading environment around the clock.
For the Injective ecosystem, this is not just a simple addition. Essentially, this is a reconstruction of the underlying logic about "what counts as valuable."
**The power of pricing has quietly changed hands, and "boredom" has instead become the king's way**
Imagine this: when U.S. Treasury token, municipal bonds, and these things become mainstream trading targets on the blockchain, what is the first change that will happen? It is that the entire market finally has a "benchmark interest rate" anchor. Previously, the yields in DeFi were all isolated and could not be compared horizontally; now, all native encryption strategies must be measured against this "risk-free yield" standard.
Let's do a multiple-choice question: on one side is liquidity mining with an annualized return of 20% but a price that rides a roller coaster, on the other side is an RWA pool with an annualized return of 5% but the underlying assets are real government bonds. How would institutions with large funds choose? Most likely, they would choose the one that looks "unexciting." Because liquidity is like water, it always flows to where the risk-adjusted returns are the most favorable.
This may completely eliminate the existing Token incentive mechanism—when "real yield" has a pricing standard, relying solely on coin printing to maintain a high APY will...