2天涨近10倍,宝可梦卡片交易是真需求还是伪情绪?

marsbitPubblicato 2025-09-03Pubblicato ultima volta 2025-09-04

在币圈玩家们关注着川普的健康疑云风波,等待着可能的博弈机会时,一个叫 $CARDS 的币以从 9 月 2 日至今最高上涨近 10 倍,市值一度突破 4 亿美元的表现将玩家们的目光吸引。

$CARDS

$CARDS,是 Solana 上实体宝可梦卡片交易平台 Collector Crypt 的代币。Collector Crypt 在 2023 年 2 月宣布完成种子轮融资,具体金额未披露,由 GSR、Big Brain Holdings、FunFair Ventures、Genesis Block Ventures、Master Ventures Investment Management、StarLaunch 和 Telos 参投。

尽管完成种子轮融资的时间已经是 2 年半前,但 $CARDS 的预售在上周才开启。5% 的代币总量(1 亿枚 $CARDS)分配给了预售,最终共募集了 16500 枚 SOL(约 350 万美元),参与预售的人数为 718 人。

此外,分配给社区的占总量 20% 代币中,有 2.5% 和预售代币同时开放领取。而根据官方发布的代币经济学,如果项目方持有的代币不计入初始流通(项目方声称目前没有出售计划),目前 $CARDS 的流通量大约为 2.12 亿枚。

按市价计算,种子轮前、种子轮以及顾问在 TGE 时解锁的代币目前价值约 167 万美元

$CARDS

官方表示目前没有出售代币的计划

其实,如果从项目本身做的事情来看,Collector Crypt 所做的宝可梦卡牌链上交易并没有那么新颖。

Polygon 上的 Courtyard.io 也已经运行了 2 年多的时间。在上个月,Courtyard 的月销售额刚刚创下约 7843 万美元的新高。自今年 2 月以来,Courtyard 的月销售额均超过 4000 万美元。

在今年的快速发展可能是 Courtyard 收获大额融资的原因。7 月 28 日,据《财富》报道,Courtyard 完成 3000 万美元 A 轮融资,Forerunner Ventures 领投,NEA 和 Y Combinator 等现有投资者跟投。

2023 年 8 月,Courtyard 刚刚引起少数 NFT 玩家关注时,我们曾对 Courtyard 进行了报导。在当时,已经有 NFT 玩家通过 Courtyard 获取宝可梦卡片并在链上进行抵押借贷。

$CARDS

在 Collector Crypt 和 Courtyard 之外,做类似业务的加密项目还有 Beezie、Drip、Emporium 以及 phygitals。

但是,Collector Crypt 在这些项目中是唯一一个发了币的,这使 $CARDS 占到了先机。当然了 Collector Crypt 自身也相当能打,上个月,其月交易量达到了约 4400 万美元,和 Courtyard 的差距并不算太大。

您可能会疑惑,在链上交易宝可梦卡片,真的有那么多真实的需求吗?

答案是没有。无论是 Collector Crypt 还是 Courtyard,他们实际赚钱的业务都是赌博式的「抽盲盒」。

$CARDS

上图就是 Collector Crypt 的宝可梦卡片扭蛋机系统。花大约 60 美元,有 80% 的概率抽到价值 30 至 60 美元的卡片,15% 的概率抽到价值 60 至 110 美元的卡片,4% 的概率抽到价值 110 至 250 美元的卡片,1% 的概率抽到价值 250 至 2000 美元的卡片。

抽到差的卡怎么办?没关系,可以以 85% 的折价直接卖回给 Collector Crypt,继续抽下去。

Collector Crypt 的这个抽奖系统在今年 1 月份正式推出,当月就实现了约 200 万美元的销售额,3 月份时成长到了月度 1255 万美元,5 月份时成长到了月度 2231 万美元,上个月更是达到了 4389 万美元。而在上个月,Collector Crypt 卡片交易市场的成交额只有约 12 万美元。


在 Collector Crypt 的月度总销售额柱状图上,来自卡片交易市场的份额几乎是完全看不到

虽然没有直接的抽奖收入数据,但我们可以从 Courtyard 此前的采访中侧面感受一下,抽奖业务究竟是有多赚钱。Courtyard 在上个月接受了 Fortune 的采访,采访中的数据提到,Courtyard 以 90% 的价值从客户手中回购抽奖卡片,然后将其以新的抽奖包形式转售给客户来赚钱,同一张卡片平均每月在平台上售出 8 次。

尽管如此,我们仍然很难说,$CARDS 的涨势是市场自驱动的「价格发现」。因为预售结束后到 2 天前,$CARDS 的价格都萎靡不振,参与了预售的玩家甚至觉得「又输了」。

但「车头」pow 与 gake 的加入极大改变了价格的走向。在他们都发推「奶」了 $CARDS 之后,大家开始相信了。

至此,我们可以对 $CARDS 做一个总结:

  • 业务叙事并不新,但收入相当能打,是 Solana 上该赛道绝对的龙头。
  • 需求是真实的,但不是宝可梦卡片交易本身的需求,而是「抽奖」的博彩式需求,同赛道的其它项目亦然。
  • 同赛道的其它项目暂未发币,因此目前市面上没有与其竞争的相同概念标的。
  • 代币持有者数量并不多,目前的上涨更多是「车头」喊单造成的。

有真东西,但在情绪驱动的上涨过后,$CARDS 能否继续保持势头,仍然需要时间检验。

Letture associate

Bitroot Public Chain Invited to Attend Tencent Cloud Singapore AI Conference, Discussing the Future Alongside Solana

On May 19, Bitroot, an emerging Layer 1 blockchain, participated in the Tencent Cloud AI Summit in Singapore alongside key industry players like Solana Foundation. The event explored the intersection of AI infrastructure, enterprise applications, AI Agents, and Web3. Bitroot's invitation, despite being pre-mainnet, highlights industry interest in its focus on high-performance, AI-native architecture tailored for future AI Agent execution and verifiable on-chain automation. Bitroot CEO Juan Jose emphasized that AI competition is shifting from model performance to data, real-world application scenarios, and trust infrastructure. He argued that for AI Agents to evolve from assistants to autonomous executors managing transactions and assets, they require low-latency, low-cost, and high-throughput blockchain environments. Bitroot aims to address this through its EVM-compatible design, optimistic parallel execution, and a consensus mechanism targeting high scalability. Currently in its Testnet 5.0 phase, Bitroot reports metrics like over 50,000 peak TPS and sub-0.3 second average block time. Its narrative positions it within a growing landscape where next-generation Layer 1s like Monad and Aptos also compete on performance, while Bitroot differentiates by integrating AI computational capabilities natively across its stack. The summit underscored that the fusion of AI and Web3 is moving from concept to infrastructure competition, where networks balancing performance, security, and verifiability will be crucial for enabling scalable AI-driven applications.

marsbit4 min fa

Bitroot Public Chain Invited to Attend Tencent Cloud Singapore AI Conference, Discussing the Future Alongside Solana

marsbit4 min fa

Hedge Fund Q1 Interpretation: Everyone Is Selling Software, Buying Chips

Hedge Funds and Mutual Funds Aligned in Q1: Dumping Software, Buying Chips A clear consensus emerged among major U.S. hedge funds and mutual funds in Q1: they were simultaneously selling software stocks and pouring capital into the semiconductor sector. This aggressive rotation pushed semiconductor exposure in hedge fund long portfolios to a record high. Hedge funds delivered a 7% return year-to-date, while only 30% of large-cap active mutual funds outperformed their benchmarks. The average short interest for S&P 500 constituents rose to 3% of market cap, the highest since 2011. Within technology, the structural shift was stark. Hedge funds' semiconductor weighting hit an all-time high, while software fell to its lowest since 2019. Excluding Microsoft, mutual funds' relative overexposure to semis vs. software was the largest since 2012. Microsoft was among the most net-sold stocks by both groups. Hedge funds net purchased semiconductor names like LRCX and AMAT. Strategies diverged on leverage and cash. Hedge funds increased their net exposure to near a one-year high after an initial cut. Mutual funds raised their cash allocation, though it remains historically low at 1.4%. Sector alignment was high in Industrials (both overweight) but divergent in Tech: hedge funds increased their Tech net tilt by a record 853 basis points, while mutual funds reduced theirs. Clear splits also appeared in Financials and Consumer Discretionary. Four stocks appeared on both Goldman's hedge fund VIP and mutual fund overweight lists: BA, MA, MRVL, and V. This "shared favorites" basket has returned 10% YTD, outperforming the equal-weight S&P 500. Notably, all "Magnificent Seven" stocks are on the hedge fund VIP list but are uniformly underweighted by mutual funds.

marsbit14 min fa

Hedge Fund Q1 Interpretation: Everyone Is Selling Software, Buying Chips

marsbit14 min fa

The Evolution Path of Physical Bitcoin

The Evolution of Physical Bitcoin Bitcoin's digital nature is its core strength, enabling self-custody and rapid global transfers. However, its intangibility also hinders mainstream adoption. For over a decade, creators have attempted to materialize Bitcoin while preserving its cash-like properties, yielding notable results. Casascius Coins, launched in 2011, were the first and most iconic physical Bitcoin. Creator Mike Caldwell generated private keys offline, printed them on coins, and sealed them with tamper-evident holograms. This model relied on user trust in the centralized issuer. Production ceased in 2013 due to regulatory pressure from FinCEN. RavenBit Coins emerged in 2014 aiming to decentralize minting by letting users generate and apply their own keys. However, this led to trust issues with numerous untrusted minters and insecure key generation methods. In 2016, Coinkite introduced Opendimes—a breakthrough in bearer asset technology. These USB-shaped devices generate and store keys internally. Funds can be received by checking the public key, but spending requires physically breaking the device to extract the private key. While innovative and open-source, its cost (~$20) and form factor limit its use for small, everyday transactions. Satochip's Satodime, a card-shaped device using similar secure chip technology, followed. It supports NFC interaction and comes in various forms. While potentially cheaper in bulk (~13€), it remains a high-security hardware wallet, not a low-cost cash substitute. A fundamental cost barrier exists. For physical Bitcoin to achieve widespread commercial use, hardware costs must drop below $1 to match the production cost of fiat banknotes. Current secure chips capable of running Bitcoin's cryptographic algorithms (like secp256k1) are too expensive. Chips like NXP's NTAG X DNA (~$3) show cost-reduction potential but lack native Bitcoin curve support. Projects like OfflineCash embed chips in banknote-like paper, but face challenges with durability, the need for custom Bitcoin-enabled chips, and the inherent requirement for users to verify balances online—which conflicts with Bitcoin's trustless ideal. Coinkite's Tapsigner, a ~$20 card with a proprietary Bitcoin NFC chip, is seen as a more practical step forward. It functions as a reloadable hardware wallet for contactless payments, solving the "change" problem and focusing on real-world retail integration, a direction also pursued by companies like Cash App and Square. In summary, the journey to physical Bitcoin has progressed from trusted centralized mints (Casascius) to user-generated keys (RavenBit) and finally to self-contained secure hardware (Opendimes, Satodime, Tapsigner). The core challenge remains developing a sufficiently low-cost, durable, and truly trustless physical bearer asset that can function like cash in daily transactions. Current solutions are either too expensive or introduce new trust assumptions, keeping the ideal of ubiquitous physical Bitcoin just out of reach for now.

marsbit1 h fa

The Evolution Path of Physical Bitcoin

marsbit1 h fa

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片