# Сопутствующие статьи по теме Revenue

Новостной центр HTX предлагает последние статьи и углубленный анализ по "Revenue", охватывающие рыночные тренды, новости проектов, развитие технологий и политику регулирования в криптоиндустрии.

Second Largest Whale Cuts Losses and Liquidates, Can AAVE Still Be Bought Amid Deepening Divisions?

The second-largest AAVE whale, excluding the project team, protocol contracts, and CEXs, has sold 230,000 AAVE tokens at a significant loss of $13.45 million, causing a 12% price drop. This sell-off reflects growing tensions between Aave Labs and the community over governance and fund allocation. The conflict began when Aave switched its default swap aggregator to Cow Swap, redirecting front-end transaction fees—previously sent to the Aave DAO treasury—to Aave Labs instead. Community members estimated this change could divert over $10 million annually from the DAO to the team, raising concerns about transparency and control. Aave Labs argued that front-end products are separate from the protocol and that the team has the right to monetize them. In response, a proposal was made to transfer control of Aave’s brand assets (domains, social accounts, etc.) to token holders. Founder Stani Kulechov opposed the proposal, citing its oversimplification of complex legal and operational issues, further escalating community backlash. The situation highlights deeper structural challenges in DeFi governance, where protocol value, team control, and community rights intersect. The outcome of an ongoing snapshot vote on the proposal may determine AAVE’s short-term price direction and long-term community trust. If the conflict signals fundamental misalignment between Aave Labs and the DAO, this could mark the start of continued tension rather than an isolated incident.

marsbit12/22 04:13

Second Largest Whale Cuts Losses and Liquidates, Can AAVE Still Be Bought Amid Deepening Divisions?

marsbit12/22 04:13

Second Largest Whale Cuts Losses and Liquidates, Can AAVE Still Be Bought Amid Deepening Conflict?

The second-largest AAVE whale, excluding the project team, protocol contracts, and exchanges, has sold off 230,000 AAVE tokens (worth approximately $38 million) at a loss, causing a 12% price drop. The sale occurred amid growing tensions between the Aave team and its community over governance and financial control. The conflict began when the community discovered that Aave Labs, without prior communication, redirected front-end exchange fees—previously directed to the Aave DAO treasury—to its own address after switching the default trading path to Cow Swap. This change could divert an estimated $10 million annually from the community to the team. Aave Labs defended the move, arguing that front-end products are separate from the protocol and that the team has the right to monetize its own infrastructure. In response, a proposal was made to transfer control of Aave’s brand assets—including domains and social accounts—to AAVE token holders. Founder Stani Kulechov opposed the proposal, calling it oversimplified and poorly structured, further escalating community backlash. The situation highlights deeper structural tensions in DeFi between team-controlled products and community-governed protocols. The outcome of the ongoing snapshot vote on the proposal may significantly influence AAVE’s price and long-term community trust.

Odaily星球日报12/22 04:10

Second Largest Whale Cuts Losses and Liquidates, Can AAVE Still Be Bought Amid Deepening Conflict?

Odaily星球日报12/22 04:10

Why Does Hyperliquid Earn Less Than Coinbase?

Hyperliquid, a decentralized exchange, processes near-Nasdaq-level perpetual trading volumes but captures significantly lower fees compared to centralized platforms like Coinbase and Robinhood. While Hyperliquid cleared $205.6 billion in notional volume over 30 days, it generated only $80.3 million in fees—an effective take rate of ~3.9 bps. In contrast, Coinbase and Robinhood achieve take rates of ~35.5 bps and ~33.5 bps, respectively, by operating as retail brokers that monetize multiple layers: distribution, balances, subscriptions, and order flow. This gap stems from a structural difference: Hyperliquid positions itself as a low-fee *market layer* (like Nasdaq), providing high-throughput execution and清算 infrastructure, while brokers like Coinbase control user relationships and extract value through higher-margin activities. Hyperliquid’s model includes permissionless distributor frontends (Builder Codes) and product deployment (HIP-3), which drive ecosystem growth but also create long-term fee compression risks by outsourcing high-value distribution. To defend its economics, Hyperliquid is taking steps to retain distribution control, integrate HIP-3 markets natively, and introduce balance-driven revenue streams like USDH (a native stablecoin with 50% reserve收益 sharing) and portfolio margin (10% interest fee on borrows). These moves aim to shift its model from pure exchange-level execution toward a hybrid approach that captures broker-like profit pools—without sacrificing its core infrastructure advantages. The key challenge remains balancing open ecosystem growth with tighter economic integration to avoid being commoditized as a wholesale execution venue.

marsbit12/18 07:03

Why Does Hyperliquid Earn Less Than Coinbase?

marsbit12/18 07:03

活动图片