An interesting contrast phenomenon: in the eyes of many VCs, the more competitors there are, the worse the market becomes. They might say "price wars are inevitable," "how to compete when opponents have ample funds," "how to stand out"—which all sound quite reasonable. But here’s a blind spot: sometimes, a large number of participants actually indicates that there is no absolute winner in the market, and instead, it hides real opportunities. In other words, intense competition may not be a bad signal but rather a sign that the market still has room for imagination.

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.
  • Reward
  • 4
  • Repost
  • Share
Comment
0/400
fomo_fightervip
· 5h ago
Competition ≠ poor market, VC firms often get this wrong. Not having an absolute winner is the real benefit.
View OriginalReply0
GasWastervip
· 5h ago
More competition means more opportunities. Those VC firms shouting about price wars have already been eliminated. The absence of an absolute winner actually indicates that there is still a window of opportunity.
View OriginalReply0
MevTearsvip
· 5h ago
Hey, that reminds me—those VCs always say that having too many competitors will be the end, but what’s the result? The most profitable tracks have always been the crowded ones.
View OriginalReply0
AlphaLeakervip
· 5h ago
A setback is not a bad thing; it just means the outcome is not yet decided. The VC firms that are shouting tired have already exited, and the true hunters are waiting for this moment.
View OriginalReply0
Trade Crypto Anywhere Anytime
qrCode
Scan to download Gate App
Community
English
  • بالعربية
  • Português (Brasil)
  • 简体中文
  • English
  • Español
  • Français (Afrique)
  • Bahasa Indonesia
  • 日本語
  • Português (Portugal)
  • Русский
  • 繁體中文
  • Українська
  • Tiếng Việt