Futures
Access hundreds of perpetual contracts
TradFi
Gold
One platform for global traditional assets
Options
Hot
Trade European-style vanilla options
Unified Account
Maximize your capital efficiency
Demo Trading
Introduction to Futures Trading
Learn the basics of futures trading
Futures Events
Join events to earn rewards
Demo Trading
Use virtual funds to practice risk-free trading
Launch
CandyDrop
Collect candies to earn airdrops
Launchpool
Quick staking, earn potential new tokens
HODLer Airdrop
Hold GT and get massive airdrops for free
Launchpad
Be early to the next big token project
Alpha Points
Trade on-chain assets and earn airdrops
Futures Points
Earn futures points and claim airdrop rewards
I saw someone say that Fleek was a garbage project before it issued its coin? This viewpoint is quite interesting, and I would like to hear from which dimensions this conclusion is drawn. Product experience, technical implementation, or team background? Feel free to share your analytical logic.
To be honest, I haven't seen any eye-catching product iterations, and no one has clarified the technical details.
The team's background looks okay, but that doesn't mean they can create something.
Why does it feel like web3 infrastructure projects are like this, after one round of financing, there are no further developments?
It was like that before the issuance of the coin, and it actually pumped even more after.
But this has to be evaluated based on whether you've used it or not.
Really? I think as long as the product works, it doesn't matter if there's a coin or not.
I don't really have any feelings about Fleek; I just think this conclusion is too arbitrary.
Wait, do some people really think like this? Sounds like a complaint from someone who hasn't made money.
If the product experience can run, it's not considered garbage, unless it's truly terrible.
This perspective is a bit funny... Do we really have to wait for a coin to consider it a serious project?