Celestia price

Celestia's perception change - when green candles arrive @celestia is humming along, currently sitting at just 0.5% of Ethereum’s market cap share. Token unlocks? Will be completed in November. Polychain dumping until then? No because their allocation got cleared with other investors like us. Lotus which is coming next Tuesday is directly addressing interoperability concerns as well as investor fears around inflation and locked staking rewards. The rollup and sovereign chain thesis remains intact. Every major corporation seems interested in launching its own chain. Why? It can give them full control over the chain and revenues associated with it. Rollups are the perfect tool for them since they can bring their own distribution and funnel it towards ‘owning’ the asset issuance layer while monetising on ordering and execution in an open and verifiable way. It doesn't make sense for them to build out an L1 since it carries higher regulatory risk, is slower and more expensive to market, and there’s an argument to be made that you can’t fully own it. Ethereum’s data availability supply, even post Fusaka will not be enough. We are already using 72% of Ethereum’s data availability target capacity, and we haven’t even reached the end-stage cycle craziness yet. This creates a strong onboarding window for Celestia, as throughput demands are exploding across the board. We see a common mistake to underestimate growth and demands for scalable and decentralised Blockspace and therefore stay delusional bullish for Celestia since they have a crystal clear scaling path understandable for their rollup providers. Since the narrative follows price and not the other way around, let me paint a positive picture of how it could be perceived when the green candles arrive Celestia Current Perception: Right now, Celestia is viewed by many as a commodity primarily because anyone can post data to it and independently verify its availability. While I don’t necessarily agree with that assessment, it remains a common viewpoint. The idea is that Celestia guarantees data availability, but not correctness. This minimal guarantee leads some to believe it lacks deeper utility or value accrual potential. The fear is that everyone who is offering cheaper DA can undercut them. Potential Future: Interop + Pricing Power Even if Celestia is perceived as commoditized, many projects may still choose to use it as their data availability layer. It actually helps them to onboard new chains/rollups since who wants to compete in a commoditized business? This could create an interoperability moat, where Celestia becomes the standard DA layer across multiple ecosystems since Ethereum is not scaling fast enough their DA capacity or new users will just not use it due to cost. As more sovereign chains anchor to the same DA layer, the overall experience begins to feel more cohesive and "composable" to the end user, even if execution remains fragmented. You have way faster finality as with Ethereum and therefore achieve that feeling. If we reach that point, there's a strong case for Celestia to become the coordination hub, one that can command a premium for enabling better interoperability between chains. The question then becomes similar to what we've seen with L1s: How much do the states of different applications and ecosystems actually interact with one another? How much is that worth? If the level of interaction is high, there's a compelling case for strong network effects to emerge. You enable chains full ownership and sovereignty while providing the rails to move value around frictionless. The Accidental Computer: Interop + Proofing Layer Over time, Celestia might evolve into a "settlement" competitor to Ethereum not by design, but through emergent behavior. If rollups begin to post proofs of execution to Celestia (rather than Ethereum), they can achieve verifiability of correct execution at a much lower cost. While this doesn’t offer settlement or finality in the Ethereum sense, it allows rollups to remain sovereign and VM-agnostic, while still giving users strong guarantees about transaction correctness. Ethereum rollups today post proofs to Ethereum for finality, settlement, and security. For L2 issued tokens a lot of this is basically a meme in the Ethereum sense since I cannot withdraw them to L1. Overall, if Celestia evolves into this vision, it essentially becomes an “Ethereum without smart contracts” but without the awkward conflict between L1 and L2, and with significantly less complexity. Honestly, I was never a fan of the “Lazy” branding sorry, sloths. It gives the impression that Celestia isn't doing much, when in reality, it's enabling a system that could end up being more robust and scalable and provide the same services that matter similar to ethereum regarding data availability and verification of execution proofs. Celestia aims to be the coordination hub of rollups, which could evolve into a more elegant and, I would argue, less fragile due to less complexity version of the “world computer”. Fees and Money in L1s One might ask if I didn’t include the fee question on purpose until now, since Celestia fees have been underwhelming in this cycle so far. To challenge that perspective, I’d argue that this won’t matter in the early phases of the ecosystem, as we’ve seen with ETH in 2017, SOL in 2021, and SUI right now. Celestia is still in its beginning stages and shouldn’t be judged based on current fees, but rather on its positioning and potential to capture fees five years down the road. There is a caveat, though: all of those execution environments have the ability to capture MEV and “own the liquidity.” We would argue that the market is currently correctly pricing Celestia's potential to capture MEV in the future, and we are aware of that. We also believe other L1s are mispriced in terms of the percentage share of MEV they can capture, given that “monolithic chains” face pressure to implement ASS to retain their applications. I wouldn’t go as far as some Ethereum statements suggesting that Solana’s capturable MEV will eventually be 0%, since that’s still a long way off—even if MEV is currently almost solely captured by validators. I would, however, assume that 10–25% will remain within the chain over time. Another perspective often discussed is the monetary side of things: a borderless, neutral asset that’s seen as a sovereign store of value, with users holding surplus due to not using the commodity effectively. There’s some truth to the argument that only BTC and maybe ETH are currently able to sell the “Asset as a Product” narrative. However, it remains to be seen how this evolves for other ecosystems. This challenges the “user holding surplus” thesis because if you are an active on-chain user experimenting with new apps, you’ll notice that we are moving quickly toward privy logins and gas abstraction. Celestia seems correctly priced for having business holding surplus, while other L1s are likely less accurately priced as they transition from user-holder surplus to business-holder surplus. We are seeing this happen increasingly quickly with apps like @Infinex, where we have also been investors. Businesses are abstracting away the poor UX of signing and gas fees to gain an edge over their competitors. One area where Lotus makes a significant improvement is on the collateral side of money, as it will now be much easier to use Celestia across other chains and move assets around. I prefer to view things in terms of dominance and relative pairs. I see positive tailwinds emerging for Celestia, while other ecosystems may struggle to maintain their current narratives as they are forced to stay competitive. Those tailwinds don’t matter if your product doesn’t win in the end, but I would strongly argue that you have a very focused team that is well-positioned to become the main DA provider for the next generation of rollups. If you’re winning this market, I don’t see a strong argument for why it shouldn’t be considered a viable Ethereum competitor, given its potential to serve as both the interoperability layer and the “Accidental Computer” in the future. Bringing it together Ethereum is definitely in its "war time" phase right now, pushing hard to expand Blobs and increase gas limits. You can tell Celestia is a serious competitor otherwise Base’s L3s would opting for it and not using AWS to stay aligned with Ethereum. Celestia is, product-wise, where Ethereum wants to be in a few years. It’s simply waiting to further scale its block size and reduce block times. That gives it a real window of opportunity to become a serious contender. All that Celestia needs is one breakout app/chain that will validate it for others. Disclaimer: I hold $TIA, $ETH and $SOL Disclaimer: I’m buying more $TIA

Celestia's perception change - when green candles arrive @celestia is humming along, currently sitting at just 0.5% of Ethereum’s market cap share. Token unlocks? Will be completed in November. Polychain dumping until then? No because their allocation got cleared with other investors like us. Lotus which is coming next Tuesday is directly addressing interoperability concerns as well as investor fears around inflation and locked staking rewards. The rollup and sovereign chain thesis remains intact. Every major corporation seems interested in launching its own chain. Why? It can give them full control over the chain and revenues associated with it. Rollups are the perfect tool for them since they can bring their own distribution and funnel it towards ‘owning’ the asset issuance layer while monetising on ordering and execution in an open and verifiable way. It doesn't make sense for them to build out an L1 since it carries higher regulatory risk, is slower and more expensive to market, and there’s an argument to be made that you can’t fully own it. Ethereum’s data availability supply, even post Fusaka will not be enough. We are already using 72% of Ethereum’s data availability target capacity, and we haven’t even reached the end-stage cycle craziness yet. This creates a strong onboarding window for Celestia, as throughput demands are exploding across the board. We see a common mistake to underestimate growth and demands for scalable and decentralised Blockspace and therefore stay delusional bullish for Celestia since they have a crystal clear scaling path understandable for their rollup providers. Since the narrative follows price and not the other way around, let me paint a positive picture of how it could be perceived when the green candles arrive Celestia Current Perception: Right now, Celestia is viewed by many as a commodity primarily because anyone can post data to it and independently verify its availability. While I don’t necessarily agree with that assessment, it remains a common viewpoint. The idea is that Celestia guarantees data availability, but not correctness. This minimal guarantee leads some to believe it lacks deeper utility or value accrual potential. The fear is that everyone who is offering cheaper DA can undercut them. Potential Future: Interop + Pricing Power Even if Celestia is perceived as commoditized, many projects may still choose to use it as their data availability layer. It actually helps them to onboard new chains/rollups since who wants to compete in a commoditized business? This could create an interoperability moat, where Celestia becomes the standard DA layer across multiple ecosystems since Ethereum is not scaling fast enough their DA capacity or new users will just not use it due to cost. As more sovereign chains anchor to the same DA layer, the overall experience begins to feel more cohesive and "composable" to the end user, even if execution remains fragmented. You have way faster finality as with Ethereum and therefore achieve that feeling. If we reach that point, there's a strong case for Celestia to become the coordination hub, one that can command a premium for enabling better interoperability between chains. The question then becomes similar to what we've seen with L1s: How much do the states of different applications and ecosystems actually interact with one another? How much is that worth? If the level of interaction is high, there's a compelling case for strong network effects to emerge. You enable chains full ownership and sovereignty while providing the rails to move value around frictionless. The Accidental Computer: Interop + Proofing Layer Over time, Celestia might evolve into a "settlement" competitor to Ethereum not by design, but through emergent behavior. If rollups begin to post proofs of execution to Celestia (rather than Ethereum), they can achieve verifiability of correct execution at a much lower cost. While this doesn’t offer settlement or finality in the Ethereum sense, it allows rollups to remain sovereign and VM-agnostic, while still giving users strong guarantees about transaction correctness. Ethereum rollups today post proofs to Ethereum for finality, settlement, and security. For L2 issued tokens a lot of this is basically a meme in the Ethereum sense since I cannot withdraw them to L1. Overall, if Celestia evolves into this vision, it essentially becomes an “Ethereum without smart contracts” but without the awkward conflict between L1 and L2, and with significantly less complexity. Honestly, I was never a fan of the “Lazy” branding sorry, sloths. It gives the impression that Celestia isn't doing much, when in reality, it's enabling a system that could end up being more robust and scalable and provide the same services that matter similar to ethereum regarding data availability and verification of execution proofs. Celestia aims to be the coordination hub of rollups, which could evolve into a more elegant and, I would argue, less fragile due to less complexity version of the “world computer”. Fees and Money in L1s One might ask if I didn’t include the fee question on purpose until now, since Celestia fees have been underwhelming in this cycle so far. To challenge that perspective, I’d argue that this won’t matter in the early phases of the ecosystem, as we’ve seen with ETH in 2017, SOL in 2021, and SUI right now. Celestia is still in its beginning stages and shouldn’t be judged based on current fees, but rather on its positioning and potential to capture fees five years down the road. There is a caveat, though: all of those execution environments have the ability to capture MEV and “own the liquidity.” We would argue that the market is currently correctly pricing Celestia's potential to capture MEV in the future, and we are aware of that. We also believe other L1s are mispriced in terms of the percentage share of MEV they can capture, given that “monolithic chains” face pressure to implement ASS to retain their applications. I wouldn’t go as far as some Ethereum statements suggesting that Solana’s capturable MEV will eventually be 0%, since that’s still a long way off—even if MEV is currently almost solely captured by validators. I would, however, assume that 10–25% will remain within the chain over time. Another perspective often discussed is the monetary side of things: a borderless, neutral asset that’s seen as a sovereign store of value, with users holding surplus due to not using the commodity effectively. There’s some truth to the argument that only BTC and maybe ETH are currently able to sell the “Asset as a Product” narrative. However, it remains to be seen how this evolves for other ecosystems. This challenges the “user holding surplus” thesis because if you are an active on-chain user experimenting with new apps, you’ll notice that we are moving quickly toward privy logins and gas abstraction. Celestia seems correctly priced for having business holding surplus, while other L1s are likely less accurately priced as they transition from user-holder surplus to business-holder surplus. We are seeing this happen increasingly quickly with apps like @Infinex, where we have also been investors. Businesses are abstracting away the poor UX of signing and gas fees to gain an edge over their competitors. One area where Lotus makes a significant improvement is on the collateral side of money, as it will now be much easier to use Celestia across other chains and move assets around. I prefer to view things in terms of dominance and relative pairs. I see positive tailwinds emerging for Celestia, while other ecosystems may struggle to maintain their current narratives as they are forced to stay competitive. Those tailwinds don’t matter if your product doesn’t win in the end, but I would strongly argue that you have a very focused team that is well-positioned to become the main DA provider for the next generation of rollups. If you’re winning this market, I don’t see a strong argument for why it shouldn’t be considered a viable Ethereum competitor, given its potential to serve as both the interoperability layer and the “Accidental Computer” in the future. Bringing it together Ethereum is definitely in its "war time" phase right now, pushing hard to expand Blobs and increase gas limits. You can tell Celestia is a serious competitor otherwise Base’s L3s would opting for it and not using AWS to stay aligned with Ethereum. Celestia is, product-wise, where Ethereum wants to be in a few years. It’s simply waiting to further scale its block size and reduce block times. That gives it a real window of opportunity to become a serious contender. All that Celestia needs is one breakout app/chain that will validate it for others. Disclaimer: I hold $TIA, $ETH and $SOL Disclaimer: I’m buying more $TIA

1/31 I believe there is growing evidence, that the White House is covering up the fact that Donald Trump has been dealing with TIA strokes. AND that he likely had a more significant ischemic stroke this week.