2025-12-17 04:23:36

Seeing someone say that Monad's daily chain fee is only $5,000 and then start criticizing the ecosystem's activity level. This sounds reasonable at first glance, but upon closer inspection, the problem is much bigger.

It's a typical spring and autumn brushstroke. On the surface, every word seems justified, but the actual message is distorted.

What is the real situation? The fundamental reason for low fees is very simple—the chain itself is very cheap. A single transfer only costs 0.00004 U. This might be hard to grasp, so let me put it another way: a total daily fee of 5,000 U is enough to support 125 million transfer transactions.

Is this called an underperforming ecosystem? Clearly, it's an extremely efficient one.

If we follow this logic, it's like evaluating "Wild Bione" by only looking at Gao Qiqiang eating a few dumplings from the police at the beginning, and then concluding "so this guy should be executed." Every word is correct, but the entire logical chain is absurd.

Using low fees as evidence of a poor ecosystem is not analysis; it's selective blindness. Those who truly understand should see—what does cheap fees mean? It means high efficiency, low barriers, and strong scalability. For a chain, these are the foundations of a thriving ecosystem.

MON-1,51%

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.

16 Likes

Reward
16
5
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

ETH_Maxi_Taxi

· 2025-12-19 18:22

1.25 billion transactions only cost $5,000? Who still dares to say it's cold? That's really absurd. --- Just because it's cheap, people criticize it. How twisted is that logic? --- Classic example, taking a single data point and jumping to conclusions—that's the daily routine of crypto commentators. --- High efficiency actually becomes evidence of a poor ecosystem? Commentators, you can clock out now. --- That Spring and Autumn style was brilliant; indeed, every word was correct, but the overall message was skewed. --- Low fees = a cold ecosystem? This theory can really be written into textbooks as a reverse indicator. --- You can't see 1.25 billion transfers, but you're fixated on the $5,000 fee? --- Selective blindness—well said, some people just fall for this trick. --- I just want to ask, which is more contradictory: cheap fees or an active ecosystem?

View OriginalReply0

DefiEngineerJack

· 2025-12-18 21:44

honestly™ this "low fees = dead ecosystem" take is just selection bias with extra steps. if you actually understand state compression and batch settlement mechanics, you'd realize $5k daily fees at that throughput is basically optimal... but sure, keep missing the forest for the trees

Reply0

GateUser-7b078580

· 2025-12-18 12:20

The data shows that 125 million transactions only amount to 5000 USD, which is really outrageous in terms of efficiency. However, we still need to observe who is actually using it. Let's wait and see the data.

View OriginalReply0

SmartMoneyWallet

· 2025-12-17 04:43

1.25 billion transactions only burn $5,000, and some still say it's cold? Truly selective blindness. --- Low fees = poor ecosystem? That logical flaw is big enough to fly a plane, a classic fallacy. --- Watching on-chain data but refusing to understand, insisting on making up stories to bash—this trick has been played out long ago. --- Don't you know what cheap fees represent? Efficiency, accessibility, scalability—aren't they all considered? --- Supporting 125 million transactions with a daily fee of $5,000—you're telling me this is an cold ecosystem? I laugh. --- Always fixating on low fees to spread FUD—these people probably don't understand how the chain actually works. --- Mistaking high TPS and low fees as a sign of decline—truly a magical operation. No wonder retail investors keep getting cut. --- Selective blindness? More like selective stupidity—insisting on turning good news into bad.

View OriginalReply0

ProbablyNothing

· 2025-12-17 04:25

Wow, 125 million transfers only amount to 5,000 USDT. Isn't that invincible? It's really absurd for people to keep pessimizing.

View OriginalReply0