2025-12-09 07:29:52

Saw a pretty baffling move. There's a SocialFi project that raised $180 million from top-tier institutions and has been quietly building for over four years. Early users even had to pay a $5 registration fee to get in. Now, out of nowhere, they’re saying they’re done with social and are going all-in on building a wallet.

There’s a lot to unpack here. How competitive is the wallet track right now? The Base chain ecosystem, all kinds of multi-chain wallets, hardware solutions—basically everything you can think of already exists. Are they really just abandoning four years of accumulated social network effects? Or did they spot an opportunity that no one else has seen?

The story they pitched during fundraising was decentralized social. Now they’re suddenly switching tracks. Who knows how the investors feel, but users are definitely left scratching their heads.

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

22 Likes

Reward
22
5
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

NFTragedy

· 21h ago

A typical fundraising story collapses, and only 180 million was spent? What happened to the promised social network? What about user retention? Turning around to make a wallet is truly astonishing. The wallet market has long been a red ocean, brother. This move really doesn't make sense. Switching tracks after just four years, the investors must be furious. This is the textbook version of how Web3 startups fail.

View OriginalReply0

BearMarketBarber

· 12-11 19:07

1. The classic VC circle routine, excellent storytelling skills for fundraising, as for execution... well, haha. 2. Burning 180 million in four years just to create a registration fee wallet? Isn't that just a rebrand and restart? 3. When social efforts fail, blame the track? I think it's more like blaming oneself. 4. The wallet market is already saturated, and people still jump in? Truly incomprehensible. 5. Fundraising talks about decentralized social, now all-in on wallets, investors must be regretting a lot. 6. Early users have to pay $5 to use it, and now they want to scam people into wallets? Dream on. 7. This team is either technically inept or has the wrong direction; frankly, there's no hope. 8. Looks like a forced pivot, a typical lesson in losing focus. 9. A social network that hasn't achieved results in four years, now trying to turn around with a wallet? Not likely. 10. Yet another project with big ambitions but poor execution, there are plenty of those in Web3.

View OriginalReply0

GweiWatcher

· 12-09 07:53

Spent 180 million over four years just to make a wallet, this logic is unbelievable. Where did the investors' money actually go? Worked on social for four years and suddenly decided to quit, who can handle that? The wallet track is already oversaturated, they’re really daring. Does anyone know who’s behind this project? It’s so outrageous. What about the promised network effect? Just thrown away like that? Still charging a five-dollar registration fee, just trying to grab money. 180 million dollars to make a wallet? Wake up, man. With this kind of entrepreneurial thinking, no wonder the project failed. Switching tracks isn’t a bad thing, but this reason is just too lame.

View OriginalReply0

AlphaWhisperer

· 12-09 07:37

1. This is the standard process of a fundraising scam: tell a grand story to grab some money, then make a "strategic adjustment," leaving users holding the bag. 2. Burning $180 million just to make a wallet project—how competitive is this track? Might as well just airdrop it directly to users. 3. Four years of social network effects? What a joke. There might not be any real network effect at all, just a bunch of zombie accounts. 4. Pivoting from SocialFi to a wallet? That's not just changing tracks; it's basically admitting the social model doesn't work. 5. A project that used to charge a $5 registration fee is now saying they're going all in on wallets... I can't quite follow this logic. 6. Investors must be asking whether the funds raised were all used to hire people to change requirements. 7. This move really treats users like fools, changing tracks without even a reasonable explanation. 8. The wallet track is already saturated, and they still dare to jump in? Unless they have major institutions backing them. 9. Projects like this should have regular audits on their burn rate. At this pace, they're bound to die sooner or later. 10. The era of $5 registration fees is over, and they're still pulling this? Shows the team really can't keep up.

View OriginalReply0

ContractHunter

· 12-09 07:30

1. A typical story of devaluation after fundraising: changing tracks, swapping teams and selling points, with investors taking heavy losses. 2. They hyped it up like crazy at first, and now they've just switched to being a wallet—this logic is wild. 3. Burned through $180 million over four years and now even charging users—this pivot is truly insane, a blatant downgrade. 4. The wallet sector is already so competitive, why force your way in? It'd be better to fully leverage your social experience. 5. Yet another excuse of "discovering new opportunities"—honestly, it just means they never solved the original problem. 6. Switching from SocialFi to a wallet—how big a mental shift does that take? Early users really got screwed. 7. A $5 registration fee ended up being the biggest joke. No wonder nobody uses it. 8. Changing tracks basically means admitting the previous direction was wrong. 9. The fundraising PPT and the current product are two completely different things—investors should reflect on this. 10. Four years of social accumulation turns out to be so worthless—they just go all in on wallets overnight. Ridiculous.

View OriginalReply0

Trending TopicsView More
#GateNovTransparencyReportReleased
11.51K Popularity
#FedRateCutComing
667.75K Popularity
#PostonSquaretoEarn$50
59.61K Popularity
#BitcoinActivityPicksUp
15.63K Popularity
#CryptoMarketRebound
507.07K Popularity

Hot Gate FunView More

1
中本聪中本聪
MC:$3.6KHolders:1
0.00%
2
BUSDBUSD
MC:$3.79KHolders:3
0.93%
3
METAMETAMASK
MC:$3.65KHolders:2
0.00%
4
GAGTGATE
MC:$3.66KHolders:1
0.78%
5
GClockGClock
MC:$3.69KHolders:2
0.13%

Sitemap