正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

The bear market didn’t kill crypto’s winners. It made them easier to identify. That’s the opportunity Austin Barack sees now: “You’ve been able to see this separation of instead of looking at 100 tokens, alright, there’s actually 10 maybe or five that are really, really compelling.” “They’re finding product...

13,818 次观看 • 29 天前 •via X (Twitter)

9 条评论

Gerry Plotter 的头像
Gerry Plotter28 天前

@AustinBarack Any mention of $TAO?

Lou 的头像
Lou29 天前

@AustinBarack The list got shorter, not worse

CoinBatmi 的头像
CoinBatmi29 天前

@AustinBarack That's so true. The bear market definitely acted as a filter, cutting out the noise and making it much clearer which projects actually have staying power. Sharp insight.

스카이 DeFi 的头像
스카이 DeFi29 天前

@AustinBarack the hard part now is resisting the 95 tokens that only look cheap

Marcus | Macro Strategist 的头像
Marcus | Macro Strategist29 天前

@AustinBarack finally someone said it

Cluster 的头像
Cluster28 天前

@AustinBarack On-chain accumulation in the surviving few is already visible in the cluster data.

泰坦链 | DeFi 的头像
泰坦链 | DeFi29 天前

@AustinBarack PMF survived

Chaos Launchpad 的头像
Chaos Launchpad29 天前

@AustinBarack The infra era is fading, that's not a fade, that's an overdue eviction notice.

Nick Nagatkin 的头像
Nick Nagatkin28 天前

@AustinBarack bear markets are just expensive due diligence

相关视频

Your brand has benefits people actually need to know, so why are you making them sit through an infomercial to learn them? I think one of the biggest opportunities with drama ads is making educational content actually entertaining. Instead of saying “here are the 5 benefits of our product,” build a story around someone who actually has the problem your product solves. Let the audience watch the problem happen. Let them get invested in the person. Then bring the product into the story naturally and show them why it matters. You’re still educating them. You’re just not making the education feel exhausting… And this is where watch time gets really interesting. If someone watches 45 seconds of your ad because they actually want to know what happens next, you just got 45 seconds to communicate your product without forcing a sales pitch down their throat. Now imagine doing that at scale. People are watching longer. They’re engaging. They’re sharing. Meta gets more signals from the creative and more opportunity to find the people who respond to it. That’s when you can start seeing really cheap CPMs and, in turn, some ridiculously cheap CPAs. Not because you found some secret targeting hack. Because you made something people actually wanted to watch & share with their friends. I think that’s where the future of advertising is going. Make the story interesting enough that people actually want to finish the ad. The education is still there. They just don’t feel like they’re being sold to…

Franky Shaw

44,780 次观看 • 17 天前

.Marc Andreessen 🇺🇸 on the fight against banning open-source AI: “There’s a real move underway to ban open-source, specifically open-source AI, and specifically the math under AI, which is fairly mind-boggling for me as an engineer. It’s not that complicated. It’s linear algebra. It’s gradient descent. These are fairly basic algorithms. They’re taught broadly in schools today. My nine-year-old is starting to learn this stuff. There are videos on YouTube that teach you how to do this. There’s textbooks. Half the kids in the Stanford freshman class are taking the intro to AI course, and they’re learning this stuff. But there are serious discussions in Washington, and they’re disconcerting on this topic because they seriously talk about this. And then there are outright bans, and there’s also what I call the potential for this stifling blanket of regulation. The precedent for that is what’s happened in the EU, where they’ve actually done this. They’ve actually implemented a stifling blanket of regulation, including most recently on AI. And the result? They’ve effectively outlawed, to a large extent, they’ve outlawed technology startups in the EU. The market has responded. There’s a handful that are really good, but there are not very many. Europe used to be amazing. Half the great tech companies in the world used to be in Europe, and now it’s down to a very small number. We have this real-life cautionary example of how this can go bad. And then we have a fair number of people in the US and in California, which is amazing, who basically want to adopt the EU model, and they’re lobbying very hard to do that. Some of those people, by the way, are true believers. They really believe that there’s a profound societal threat or existential threat, or various other kinds of threats. They really believe it—you can see it in their eyes. And then there’s a bunch of other people that have commercial self-interest. They want to establish monopolies or cartels of different kinds. They want there to be government protection for their business. And so there’s this unholy alliance that has formed between these two groups. We just had this real fight in California.”

Arjun Khemani

91,352 次观看 • 1 年前

Marc Andreessen explains the 3 Necessities for Start-up Success: "The general criteria for a successful high-tech startup, in my view, you see different sort of rules of thumb from different people. But the three big things you always come back to are, is there a big market? And by the way, that comes in two parts. Is there a big existing market that you think you can go after and sort of displace incumbents or do you believe there will be a new market that will be big? So big market. Is there a fundamental technology or economic change that causes you to basically justify having a new company? And that's really important. And the way I always think about that is, is there a 10X change happening in the technology landscape? Is something 10X faster or 10X cheaper or 10X better? And if it's not 10X, we as both VCs and entrepreneurs, we really have to ask ourselves like, is it really worth doing? Because it's really hard. I mean, it's really hard to start new companies. new companies generally shouldn't exist. Existing companies are usually pretty good at what they do. And so for a new company to exist, it not only has to like come in and go into business and bring a product to market, but it has to bring a product to market that's so much better than what already exists that it punches through the sort of status quo. And most customers in most markets are pretty happy buying from the current suppliers and so there has to be a real kind of edge on the thing and we look for that in either a technology change, usually a technology change or an economic change. which are often the same thing. And then the third is team. Is the team outstanding? And if you think about this as an entrepreneur, it becomes a question of the founding team. Some companies are solo founders and they can work, but generally most of us, like myself, we're human beings, we're mortal. You want to have a founding team of complementary skill sets. And so you want to have at least one super strong technologist, quite possibly more than one. Some of the best startups are actually more than one founding technologist and then it often helps to have somebody who's like a product or who's a market or sales person or has a sort of really good understanding of business on the team, certainly helps a lot. And so we sort of look at market, product, and team. And the reality is you need all three. I would say, interestingly, if you're going to compromise as an investor, if we're going to compromise on one of those, it would actually be the product. And the reason I say that is because a great market is a lot easier to make up for with iterative product execution than a poor market. Because the problem with a poor market, a small market, is even if you do a great job on the product, there just aren't that many customers. It's hard to ever get big."

Founder Mode

39,005 次观看 • 8 个月前