Yeah sure. Here’s why Aster (probably) isn’t a real disruptor: Will caveat by saying I’m not an Aster hater, and am happy people are making money onchain on a trade. I just think people are sort of conflating a cz / attention trade with a legitimate protocol-driven thesis. There are plenty of Aster shillers who see the trade for what it is, and hats off to them for killing it. It takes a bit of time, a lot of iteration, and a lot of execution to go from what the aster experience is today to what hyperliquid has built over the past 2+ years. Not going to go into all the nuances to keep it brief but running an offchain perps book with an onchain frontend is not rocket science. If you want to move all this activity onchain into a custom-fit L1 with a HyperBFT like consensus it’s not easy lol. If you want to be like Hyperliquid and actually lead in the DEX space by creating net new and liquid perp markets and spot markets on an onchain order book it’s even harder. Reminder that all of these players are benefiting from Hyperliquid creating the actual onchain liquidity for these long tail perps as a first mover. It’s a whole other thing to operate in uncharted territory and ship net new liquid pairs like HL has consistently done over the past 1.5 years. People are complaining that HL doesn’t have enough validators but you try finding 20+ external validators willing to colocate with you while upkeeping this kind of performance. Then try to make your infra accommodative enough to allow makers to maintain tight spreads on a $PUMP pre-market perp while hosting everything onchain. I am not saying Hyperliquid cannot be disrupted. In fact I expect it to happen at some point. As I’ve repeatedly said, we rarely see an incumbent maintain 90% share in a space moving as fast as crypto. But when you look at precedents for the disrupter thesis, whether it’s Solana vs. Ethereum, USDe vs USDT/USDC, hl vs dydx etc., there is one thing you almost always see play out: The disruptor launches with a 10x better product and/or a completely differentiated design principle. The problem with saying Aster is going take time to get better is Aster does not have the same luxuries as Hyperliquid did. Jeff could spend 2 years improving the product because there was no decent alternative. Those trying to disrupt Hyperliquid have to launch with a BETTER product within the first few months. Because hyperliquid exists now lmao. When I look at other potential hl disruptors I see teams trying to be faster, more trust minimized, more differentiated on day 1 of mainnet. Alot of these disruptors are taking incremental design principles - building as dedicated rollups, using an SVM client, maintaining composability with broader ecosystems, offering multi-asset margin, reshaping toxic flow patterns, changing sequencing rules, among other needle movers. At least for now I don’t see much of this happening for Aster. So do I think $ASTER ‘s price can flip $HYPE ‘s because of cz, supply control, incentives and narrative? Sure. But imo you’re fooling yourself if you believe this is a real disruptor in any way shape or form. It’s incredibly easy to game volume these days. Don’t fall for the trap of believing altcoin CT accounts who tell you Aster is a better product than hyperliquid when they probably have made less than five perp trades in their entire life.