The post Are Layer-1 Blockchains Still Valuable, or Is Their Investment Case Fading? appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Blockchain Crypto debates usually revolve around price action or upcoming upgrades, but the latest controversy goes deeper than market cycles. Key Takeaways The L1 debate now hinges on whether defensibility or exponential adoption determines long-term value. Wang believes most blockchains are too easily replaced to justify lasting valuations. Qureshi argues that early-stage fundamentals are misleading and that blockchains should be evaluated on long-term global scale potential.  The disagreement now centers on whether base-layer blockchains — the networks that power everything else — are still capable of holding long-term value. Two industry figures, Qiao Wang and Haseeb Qureshi, offered opposing outlooks this week, and their exchange has exposed a philosophical divide that could shape how investors evaluate tokens going forward. The Argument for Fragility: Blockchains Are Too Easy to Abandon Qiao Wang’s case does not rely on the traditional valuation lens. Instead, it comes down to defensibility. In his view, there is little stopping users and developers from leaving one blockchain and moving to another. He sees this portability as the core weakness of most Layer-1 ecosystems. Developers can redeploy their applications quickly, users can switch networks with minimal friction, and the number of new blockchains continues to accelerate. Because of this, Wang believes the majority of L1s operate more like interchangeable utilities than irreplaceable platforms. He does not expect them to collapse; he simply does not expect them to become the strongest long-term performers. The only exception, in his framework, is when a chain controls not just the underlying ledger but also the applications that run on it. A vertically unified design, he argues, creates the first real barrier to exit. He points to Solana, Base, Hyperliquid, and certain new corporate chains as early examples of this emerging model. The Argument for Durability: Early Systems Look Small Before They Scale… The post Are Layer-1 Blockchains Still Valuable, or Is Their Investment Case Fading? appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Blockchain Crypto debates usually revolve around price action or upcoming upgrades, but the latest controversy goes deeper than market cycles. Key Takeaways The L1 debate now hinges on whether defensibility or exponential adoption determines long-term value. Wang believes most blockchains are too easily replaced to justify lasting valuations. Qureshi argues that early-stage fundamentals are misleading and that blockchains should be evaluated on long-term global scale potential.  The disagreement now centers on whether base-layer blockchains — the networks that power everything else — are still capable of holding long-term value. Two industry figures, Qiao Wang and Haseeb Qureshi, offered opposing outlooks this week, and their exchange has exposed a philosophical divide that could shape how investors evaluate tokens going forward. The Argument for Fragility: Blockchains Are Too Easy to Abandon Qiao Wang’s case does not rely on the traditional valuation lens. Instead, it comes down to defensibility. In his view, there is little stopping users and developers from leaving one blockchain and moving to another. He sees this portability as the core weakness of most Layer-1 ecosystems. Developers can redeploy their applications quickly, users can switch networks with minimal friction, and the number of new blockchains continues to accelerate. Because of this, Wang believes the majority of L1s operate more like interchangeable utilities than irreplaceable platforms. He does not expect them to collapse; he simply does not expect them to become the strongest long-term performers. The only exception, in his framework, is when a chain controls not just the underlying ledger but also the applications that run on it. A vertically unified design, he argues, creates the first real barrier to exit. He points to Solana, Base, Hyperliquid, and certain new corporate chains as early examples of this emerging model. The Argument for Durability: Early Systems Look Small Before They Scale…

Are Layer-1 Blockchains Still Valuable, or Is Their Investment Case Fading?

Blockchain

Crypto debates usually revolve around price action or upcoming upgrades, but the latest controversy goes deeper than market cycles.

Key Takeaways
  • The L1 debate now hinges on whether defensibility or exponential adoption determines long-term value.
  • Wang believes most blockchains are too easily replaced to justify lasting valuations.
  • Qureshi argues that early-stage fundamentals are misleading and that blockchains should be evaluated on long-term global scale potential. 

The disagreement now centers on whether base-layer blockchains — the networks that power everything else — are still capable of holding long-term value.

Two industry figures, Qiao Wang and Haseeb Qureshi, offered opposing outlooks this week, and their exchange has exposed a philosophical divide that could shape how investors evaluate tokens going forward.

The Argument for Fragility: Blockchains Are Too Easy to Abandon

Qiao Wang’s case does not rely on the traditional valuation lens. Instead, it comes down to defensibility. In his view, there is little stopping users and developers from leaving one blockchain and moving to another. He sees this portability as the core weakness of most Layer-1 ecosystems.

Developers can redeploy their applications quickly, users can switch networks with minimal friction, and the number of new blockchains continues to accelerate. Because of this, Wang believes the majority of L1s operate more like interchangeable utilities than irreplaceable platforms. He does not expect them to collapse; he simply does not expect them to become the strongest long-term performers.

The only exception, in his framework, is when a chain controls not just the underlying ledger but also the applications that run on it. A vertically unified design, he argues, creates the first real barrier to exit. He points to Solana, Base, Hyperliquid, and certain new corporate chains as early examples of this emerging model.

The Argument for Durability: Early Systems Look Small Before They Scale

Haseeb Qureshi sees the matter very differently. He believes the market has become overly skeptical at the exact stage when it should be thinking biggest. His essay, centered on exponential growth curves rather than moat theory, compares the long-term trajectory of blockchains to the early days of digital commerce.

To Qureshi, the criticism of L1 valuations stems from a linear mindset. Revenues on a developing network look unimpressive for years until adoption hits critical mass. Once that happens, the infrastructure transitions from experimental to foundational, and valuations that once looked irrational suddenly look conservative.

He argues that applying traditional metrics such as price-to-earnings ratios fails to capture how network effects compound. If even a small fraction of global economic activity eventually settles through blockchain rails, the scale would justify valuations far beyond what current sentiment assumes.

A Debate With No Middle Ground

Although the two perspectives rely on different logic, they converge on a single question: what should investors prioritize? One philosophy rewards tokens that build structural lock-in. The other rewards tokens positioned to capture massive future volume, even if their fundamentals look fragile today.

What makes this clash significant is that both frameworks cannot dominate the market at the same time. An industry defined by easy migration and constant competition would support Wang’s caution. An industry where blockchains become core financial infrastructure would validate Qureshi’s optimism.

The conversation is not really about Ethereum, Solana, Monad, Hyperliquid, or any individual network. It is about how value forms — through defensibility or through scale.


The information provided in this article is for educational purposes only and does not constitute financial, investment, or trading advice. Coindoo.com does not endorse or recommend any specific investment strategy or cryptocurrency. Always conduct your own research and consult with a licensed financial advisor before making any investment decisions.

Author

Alex is an experienced financial journalist and cryptocurrency enthusiast. With over 8 years of experience covering the crypto, blockchain, and fintech industries, he is well-versed in the complex and ever-evolving world of digital assets. His insightful and thought-provoking articles provide readers with a clear picture of the latest developments and trends in the market. His approach allows him to break down complex ideas into accessible and in-depth content. Follow his publications to stay up to date with the most important trends and topics.

Next article

Source: https://coindoo.com/are-layer-1-blockchains-still-valuable-or-is-their-investment-case-fading/

Market Opportunity
Solayer Logo
Solayer Price(LAYER)
$0.1623
$0.1623$0.1623
-1.45%
USD
Solayer (LAYER) Live Price Chart
Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact service@support.mexc.com for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.

You May Also Like

X to cut off InfoFi crypto projects from accessing its API

X to cut off InfoFi crypto projects from accessing its API

X, the most widely used app for crypto projects, is changing its API access policy. InfoFi projects, which proliferated non-organic bot content, will be cut off
Share
Cryptopolitan2026/01/16 02:50
X Just Killed Kaito and InfoFi Crypto, Several Tokens Crash

X Just Killed Kaito and InfoFi Crypto, Several Tokens Crash

The post X Just Killed Kaito and InfoFi Crypto, Several Tokens Crash appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. X has revoked API access for apps that reward users for
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2026/01/16 03:42
Google's AP2 protocol has been released. Does encrypted AI still have a chance?

Google's AP2 protocol has been released. Does encrypted AI still have a chance?

Following the MCP and A2A protocols, the AI Agent market has seen another blockbuster arrival: the Agent Payments Protocol (AP2), developed by Google. This will clearly further enhance AI Agents' autonomous multi-tasking capabilities, but the unfortunate reality is that it has little to do with web3AI. Let's take a closer look: What problem does AP2 solve? Simply put, the MCP protocol is like a universal hook, enabling AI agents to connect to various external tools and data sources; A2A is a team collaboration communication protocol that allows multiple AI agents to cooperate with each other to complete complex tasks; AP2 completes the last piece of the puzzle - payment capability. In other words, MCP opens up connectivity, A2A promotes collaboration efficiency, and AP2 achieves value exchange. The arrival of AP2 truly injects "soul" into the autonomous collaboration and task execution of Multi-Agents. Imagine AI Agents connecting Qunar, Meituan, and Didi to complete the booking of flights, hotels, and car rentals, but then getting stuck at the point of "self-payment." What's the point of all that multitasking? So, remember this: AP2 is an extension of MCP+A2A, solving the last mile problem of AI Agent automated execution. What are the technical highlights of AP2? The core innovation of AP2 is the Mandates mechanism, which is divided into real-time authorization mode and delegated authorization mode. Real-time authorization is easy to understand. The AI Agent finds the product and shows it to you. The operation can only be performed after the user signs. Delegated authorization requires the user to set rules in advance, such as only buying the iPhone 17 when the price drops to 5,000. The AI Agent monitors the trigger conditions and executes automatically. The implementation logic is cryptographically signed using Verifiable Credentials (VCs). Users can set complex commission conditions, including price ranges, time limits, and payment method priorities, forming a tamper-proof digital contract. Once signed, the AI Agent executes according to the conditions, with VCs ensuring auditability and security at every step. Of particular note is the "A2A x402" extension, a technical component developed by Google specifically for crypto payments, developed in collaboration with Coinbase and the Ethereum Foundation. This extension enables AI Agents to seamlessly process stablecoins, ETH, and other blockchain assets, supporting native payment scenarios within the Web3 ecosystem. What kind of imagination space can AP2 bring? After analyzing the technical principles, do you think that's it? Yes, in fact, the AP2 is boring when it is disassembled alone. Its real charm lies in connecting and opening up the "MCP+A2A+AP2" technology stack, completely opening up the complete link of AI Agent's autonomous analysis+execution+payment. From now on, AI Agents can open up many application scenarios. For example, AI Agents for stock investment and financial management can help us monitor the market 24/7 and conduct independent transactions. Enterprise procurement AI Agents can automatically replenish and renew without human intervention. AP2's complementary payment capabilities will further expand the penetration of the Agent-to-Agent economy into more scenarios. Google obviously understands that after the technical framework is established, the ecological implementation must be relied upon, so it has brought in more than 60 partners to develop it, almost covering the entire payment and business ecosystem. Interestingly, it also involves major Crypto players such as Ethereum, Coinbase, MetaMask, and Sui. Combined with the current trend of currency and stock integration, the imagination space has been doubled. Is web3 AI really dead? Not entirely. Google's AP2 looks complete, but it only achieves technical compatibility with Crypto payments. It can only be regarded as an extension of the traditional authorization framework and belongs to the category of automated execution. There is a "paradigm" difference between it and the autonomous asset management pursued by pure Crypto native solutions. The Crypto-native solutions under exploration are taking the "decentralized custody + on-chain verification" route, including AI Agent autonomous asset management, AI Agent autonomous transactions (DeFAI), AI Agent digital identity and on-chain reputation system (ERC-8004...), AI Agent on-chain governance DAO framework, AI Agent NPC and digital avatars, and many other interesting and fun directions. Ultimately, once users get used to AI Agent payments in traditional fields, their acceptance of AI Agents autonomously owning digital assets will also increase. And for those scenarios that AP2 cannot reach, such as anonymous transactions, censorship-resistant payments, and decentralized asset management, there will always be a time for crypto-native solutions to show their strength? The two are more likely to be complementary rather than competitive, but to be honest, the key technological advancements behind AI Agents currently all come from web2AI, and web3AI still needs to keep up the good work!
Share
PANews2025/09/18 07:00