2026-01-17 16:31:33

Industry consensus on the valuation criteria for meme coins is gradually forming. A well-known exchange executive recently pointed out that the key to standing out lies in four dimensions—historical background, narrative tension, actual development progress, and community consensus strength.

A project has recently attracted attention, with a name related to the Bitcoin creator, but its approach is quite unique. Many people have noticed that it hits all four key points. Historically, it carries a certain cultural identity; in terms of storytelling, it can attract sustained attention from specific communities; in development, it has been actively progressing, with the ecosystem gradually improving; and most importantly, the community cohesion is quite strong.

This perhaps indicates that truly surviving and thriving meme coins are not solely dependent on hype and emotions. They need a solid narrative foundation, visible development actions, and a self-reinforcing consensus mechanism. When these elements stack up, they can stand out from many other projects.

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.

17 Likes

Reward
17
5
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

SoliditySurvivor

· 5h ago

It sounds quite reasonable, but honestly, no matter how good these four dimensions sound, in the end, it still depends on whether you can make money haha --- So basically, you need a story, infrastructure, and popularity—only then can you form a combo punch? It feels like setting a benchmark for all projects --- The project related to the Bitcoin creator... isn’t it just another rebranded copycat? I now have to verify these kinds of things repeatedly before I dare to touch them --- Strong community cohesion is actually the most convincing; a bunch of people banding together makes the project look reliable. But in a bear market, you’ll see who’s just swimming naked --- Having construction and consensus has been talked about for many years. The problem is most meme coins simply can’t do it, and they sound even better than they perform --- The logic is sound, but the reality is that 90% of new projects can’t survive the second wave of hype, and their survival rate is truly worrying

View OriginalReply0

VCsSuckMyLiquidity

· 5h ago

Hmm... Four dimensions sound impressive, but they really hit the point. Only meme coins with solid fundamentals can last long. Community cohesion is the most critical factor. No matter how good a project is, if it lacks popularity, it's useless. I've seen too many "perfect" projects die in obscurity. Does this project have all these elements? It still depends on whether it can maintain its momentum later on. Don't let it be just a flash in the pan. Progress in development should be judged by code and ecosystem. Talking without action is all nonsense... I only trust on-chain data, not just hype. The fact that meme coins have come this far shows that the market is truly maturing. We can no longer go back to the era where emotions alone drove trading.

View OriginalReply0

NFTArchaeologist

· 5h ago

Basically, meme coins need to have some real substance; relying solely on hype and speculation will eventually lead to their downfall. The four-dimensional theory sounds good, but how many projects can actually fully implement it in practice? Truly. I looked into that project related to Satoshi, and the community is indeed quite active. It all depends on whether their future build can keep up with the hype. The biggest challenge for meme coins is the narrative coherence; many projects fall apart as their stories unravel during development. Speaking of which, the projects with true staying power are often the boring but persistent ones. On the other hand, those that boast all day tend to die the fastest.

View OriginalReply0

FancyResearchLab

· 5h ago

Oh no, we're back to discussing the four-dimensional judgment method. I tested this theory in the contract the day before yesterday, and it should be feasible in theory... But it's just another useless innovation; the key is how long the community can stick with it without dropping the ball. Wait, the name is related to Satoshi Nakamoto? Now I'm enlightened, and I've locked myself in again.

View OriginalReply0

MiningDisasterSurvivor

· 5h ago

It's the same old spiel... I've been through this before. The projects in 2018 were also hyped up like this. And what was the result? Community cohesion, narrative tension—at the end of the day, it was just a mess. Listen, the so-called four dimensions sound impressive, but the key is whether the project team has truly invested real money, not just storytelling. Can a project get popular just by having a name that sounds like Bitcoin? Come on, many Ponzi schemes rely on this kind of packaging to survive for half a year. In my opinion, it's better to observe for three months before hyping. Only projects that survive the bear market are good projects.

View OriginalReply0