2026-01-17 15:30:19

In the wave of DeFi, new public chains are competing to build "ecosystem platforms," but Plasma has taken a different path: focusing on stablecoins, especially as a payment network for USDT. This is not just another clone Layer 1, but a targeted solution to industry pain points.

The current issues are very real: when users transfer stablecoins on-chain, Gas fees are unpredictable, and network congestion leads to long transaction times. Ethereum and some Layer 2 solutions have not fully solved these problems. Want to use cryptocurrency for daily payments? Experience as smooth as Alipay? That's basically unrealistic.

Plasma's answer is straightforward: build a dedicated chain for stablecoins. Zero transfer fees, optimized natively for USDT. Instead of competing with mainstream public chains in the DeFi ecosystem, it aims to excel in the payment sector. This idea sounds simple, but it hits a real need—large-scale cryptocurrency payment applications remain a blank spot to this day.

The interesting part of this "point breakthrough" approach is that it bypasses direct competition with mature public chains. Ethereum has NFTs, lending, derivatives; Plasma doesn't compete in these areas, only focusing on the payment layer. Is it niche? Yes, but within that niche, there is a clear and urgent demand. From cross-border enterprise settlements to personal remittances, stablecoin payment scenarios are enough to support an entire public chain.

The logic behind the $XPL token is also clear: as a network's rights and governance token, its value is directly linked to the adoption of Plasma as a payment infrastructure. The more users and transactions, the higher the network value, and the stronger the token demand. This correlation is much more reliable than those "ecosystem tokens."

Of course, Plasma faces many challenges. USDT liquidity, user education, and competition with existing payment systems all require time to validate. But in today's highly competitive public chain environment, this differentiated positioning at least offers it a chance to survive and break out.

XPL-3,62%

ETH-4,58%

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
6
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

DeFiCaffeinator

· 01-20 14:24

Zero fees sound great, but can USDT liquidity really keep up? That's the key.

View OriginalReply0

ETHReserveBank

· 01-19 16:54

Sounds good, but who will guarantee the liquidity of USDT? Probably relying on fundraising to pour money in again. --- Promises of zero fees are heard too often; in the end, prices will still go up. --- I agree with the positioning of the payment layer, but compared to the Lightning Network, someone has already done this. --- XPL's value bundling logic is indeed more reliable than an ecosystem token, but the key is actual transaction volume. --- A differentiated approach is good, but I'm worried it will just become a playground for investors. --- I agree that stablecoin payments are a necessary demand, but changing user habits is not that easy. --- Why not just use USDT on Tron directly? It's already incredibly cheap. --- This single-point breakthrough logic feels like saying "we don't know anything, we only know how to do one thing." --- How is the Plasma team's background? That’s the key. --- Lack of sufficient liquidity means no volume can be generated; minor issue.

View OriginalReply0

just_vibin_onchain

· 01-17 16:00

Zero fee sounds great, but can it really be used? I'm afraid it's just air. USDT payment dedicated chain sounds good, but let's see if anyone is actually using it first. It's getting to the point where we have to do payment layers; this industry really has no new tricks. $XPL's logic of linking adoption rate isn't bad; it's more reliable than a bunch of ecosystem tokens. It sounds nice, but the key is whether someone will buy in; otherwise, it's just another dead chain. I respect the idea of breaking through with a single point, but I'm worried players are still the same old faces. Can the liquidity hurdle be overcome? That's the real question. Instead of internal competition, it's better to focus on one track; I agree with that. There's a new L1 every day, and Plasma's approach is indeed differentiated. Let's wait and see.

View OriginalReply0

PuzzledScholar

· 01-17 16:00

Speaking of which, this idea is indeed fresh, but can zero fees really sustain it? The concept of a payment layer is good, but I'm worried it might turn into a story of loving the dragon in vain. The urgent need for stablecoin payments is real; the key is whether Plasma can retain users. It sounds very ideal, but I still have some doubts about whether it can match the smoothness of Alipay. Focusing on a single track is a good strategy, but the real test is whether it can capture market share.

View OriginalReply0

ImpermanentLossEnjoyer

· 01-17 15:51

Zero fees sound great, but how to ensure USDT liquidity? --- Interesting, at last someone is not just following the trend of building ecosystems. --- Can a single chain really handle the payment layer? I still have some doubts. --- The logic is clear, but it depends on whether Plasma can survive the cold start phase. --- Instead of saying differentiated positioning, it's more like being forced to take a niche route. --- Gas fee issues haven't been solved even with L2, why would Plasma work? --- Looks good, but the experience is still far from Alipay.

View OriginalReply0

ValidatorViking

· 01-17 15:42

ngl, the zero-fee angle sounds battle-tested on paper but validator economics worry me—who's actually securing consensus finality here? slashing risk unclear.

Reply0