正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

Kevin asked the question directly: “Why would a crypto entrepreneur care more about building options than perps?” Nick's answer wasn't simply that options are another way to trade. The bigger argument is that options can unlock an entirely different layer of financial products. “I think the TAM of options...

50,416 次观看 • 1 个月前 •via X (Twitter)

35 条评论

The Jedi M@n 🧑‍🦯 的头像
The Jedi M@n 🧑‍🦯1 个月前

Ft: @KevinWSHPod × @nickforster

CIP3R 的头像
CIP3R1 个月前

Kevin opened the conversation very well

The Jedi M@n 🧑‍🦯 的头像
The Jedi M@n 🧑‍🦯1 个月前

I love his interviews man

Sorena 的头像
Sorena1 个月前

Interesting perspective on options trading

Begard 的头像
Begard1 个月前

Options could unlock much more than just another trading market

Joe 的头像
Joe1 个月前

I need to see the full thing

kimoa 的头像
kimoa1 个月前

The angle here feels distinctive

ABID 的头像
ABID1 个月前

options unlocking a whole new layer of financial products

EKO 的头像
EKO1 个月前

options are just perps with a date attached

TUNCAY 的头像
TUNCAY1 个月前

Options unlock new financial products and could build a stronger network effect.

Creed 的头像
Creed1 个月前

rare to see this level of clarity lately

Rahi 的头像
Rahi1 个月前

Well said bro

S.O.G.DAO 的头像
S.O.G.DAO1 个月前

If options really become bigger than perps, what do you think will drive that shift most?

IGRIS 的头像
IGRIS1 个月前

that's where the conversation gets interesting.

Rose 🌸 的头像
Rose 🌸1 个月前

That's a fascinating perspective on the future of financial products

HLevi 的头像
HLevi1 个月前

That's a wild thought about options being the building blocks for new financial system

KRYPTON.IO 的头像
KRYPTON.IO1 个月前

The bigger thesis isn’t options vs. perps—it’s options as building blocks for a new financial system. Programmability, hedging, yield and structured products could unlock a much larger market. 👀🔥

Jesse 的头像
Jesse1 个月前

Perps I good yeah, but having Options is far better Thanks for this man

CLAVÉ 的头像
CLAVÉ1 个月前

I think this is the question every one needs to be asked atp

Ziadul Hasan 的头像
Ziadul Hasan1 个月前

Options feel closer to programmable risk than perps.

ƁĘŊŤØ§ 的头像
ƁĘŊŤØ§1 个月前

Thanks for sharing

yeito.eth 的头像
yeito.eth1 个月前

options staying open for months explains why their liquidity can become so sticky positions build gravity

𝙂 的头像
𝙂1 个月前

Options could become much bigger than trading, they might unlock entirely new financial products.

WEB3CULTURE 的头像
WEB3CULTURE1 个月前

This is so intriguing

Crypto₿uddie🐼 的头像
Crypto₿uddie🐼1 个月前

Enjoyed the podcast

Chan. 的头像
Chan.1 个月前

options are the future of finance, mark my words

Kiva 🏴‍☠️ 的头像
Kiva 🏴‍☠️1 个月前

options are just way more flexible than perps

Devid 的头像
Devid1 个月前

because perps are binary direction, options code risk.

Airdrop Hunter 的头像
Airdrop Hunter1 个月前

Options offer more sophisticated financial product possibilities than perps.

RYZE -`𖹭´- 的头像
RYZE -`𖹭´-1 个月前

Liquidity is the biggest hurdle here

The Eddy.eth 的头像
The Eddy.eth1 个月前

Your point about options unlocking new financial products is fascinating.

Kong Trading 🦍 的头像
Kong Trading 🦍1 个月前

Okay this just about right

riRoyal.Base.eth 的头像
riRoyal.Base.eth1 个月前

options as programmable building blocks beat perps long term.

eth⌘ (꧁IP꧂)(✸,✸)⛓(Ø,G)/acc.ink 的头像
eth⌘ (꧁IP꧂)(✸,✸)⛓(Ø,G)/acc.ink1 个月前

This is definitely worth following

0xho3in(❖,❖) 的头像
0xho3in(❖,❖)1 个月前

Options really do open up new possibilities in trading. Exciting to see where this goes!

相关视频

DROPS 41: Derive.xyz - Why Options Will Beat Perps This Decade Nick Forster | Derive is co-founder and CEO of Derive, the largest on-chain options exchange. Today we get into what almost killed the company, why they rebranded overnight, and why he thinks options - not perps - are the real endgame for on-chain finance. We talk about: - The token playbook that killed 98% of crypto projects - The wedding in Portugal where the whole team almost walked away - Rebranding from Lyra to Derive in nine days - Why options will outgrow perps this decade - What blockchains are actually bad at - Why AI makes options the natural vehicle for agent finance And much more… Timestamps: 0:00 - Introduction 2:04 - The Mission Behind Derive 3:00 - What Does Derive Actually Do? 5:18 - Who Actually Uses Options? 7:03 - Nick's Journey Into Crypto 8:09 - The problem with crypto's last five years 11:17 - The token listing playbook 17:44 - Partnership: FortisX 18:10 - The $15M Market Cap Crisis 24:12 - Why Nick Stayed 26:01 - What finally changed 29:38 - Why Options Could Become Huge 32:52 - Options vs Perpetuals 34:37 - Making options accessible to retail 38:36 - Why Derive Rebranded 40:12 - From V1 to V3 46:03 - The Real Power of Programmable Finance 48:19 - What Blockchains are actually Bad at 49:59 - What's Derive bad at? 50:53 - The endgame for Derive 51:47 - What's Holding Derive Back? 52:50 - Why Crypto Builders Need to Stick Together 54:49 - Why Stay in Crypto in 2026? 56:57 - Conclusion

MR SHIFT 🦁

150,446 次观看 • 1 个月前

Rahul Vohra on how to measure product/market fit Rahul Vohra is the founder and CEO of Superhuman. He was looking for a metric to measure product/market fit so that he and his team could optimize, and he came across the following methodology from Sean Ellis: Simply ask your users: “How would you feel if you could no longer use the product?” with three options: (1) not disappointed, (2) somewhat disappointed, or (3) very disappointed. It turns out that the benchmark for product/market fit across hundreds of venture-backed startups is 40% of respondents saying “very disappointed”. And as Rahul puts it: “If more than 40% of your users would be very disappointed without your product, then you should focus on growing your company. If less than 40% of your users would be very disappointed without your product, then you’ll probably struggle to grow.” 40% may not sound like a lot, but it’s an incredibly hard benchmark to beat. For example, Slack posed this to 731 customers early in the company’s history, and 51% said they would be very disappointed without Slack. One might expect a terrific product like Slack to have a score of 60-80%, but that wasn’t the case. Rahul’s explanation of why the response options are focused on disappointment rather than happiness is interesting too: “I think the reason behind that is that if you ask people how they feel about a product and you give them positive potential responses, I think it invites more bias. People are more likely to be polite. And it also doesn’t get to the heart of the matter which is: how necessary has your product become in people’s lives? If you’re trying to build a company that’s going to stand the test of time, you really do have to build a product that matters and that people ultimately come to depend on because it’s just so incredible at what it does. And that’s what this question gets to the heart of.”

Michael McGuiness

67,106 次观看 • 2 年前