Following concepts such as MCP, the concept of Internet Capital Market (ICM) in the Web2 field has also been introduced into Web3. ICM is a decentralized funding method where funds flow directly to developers without the need for venture capital or intermediaries. Developers publish ideas, users use tokens to participate, and when the project is popular, the token appreciates, and if it is not recognized, it dies naturally. ICM breaks down the boundaries of crowdfunding, fundraising and speculation, allowing capital to move more directly and freely.
In the ICM narrative, the project that came out first was Believe. As a representative project under the ICM concept, Believe’s platform token $LAUNCHCOIN rose by more than 500% in one day, and its market value exceeded $300 million. On the Believe platform, users can invest in creators’ creative ideas by posting and issuing coins. Token creators and early adopters are rewarded with more incentives, and Believe is backed by the Solana Foundation. At the same time, after experiencing a short-term explosive heat, the entire ecosystem has cooled down in the short term, and the project has also aroused doubts and controversies in the community. Let’s find out.
Believe daily trading fees rank first among new issuance platforms on Solana
Believe optimized the original token issuance model on May 23rd. The method of issuing tokens immediately upon posting by account @launchcoin will be suspended. Currently, the platform will adopt an open listing mechanism, allowing developers to submit and publish projects instantly through the official website, without official review. Meanwhile, to prevent “water pulling” and projects lacking actual products, the platform will block such developers from obtaining platform fees and will conduct preliminary screening based on community feedback, with plans to introduce a compulsory mechanism within products in the future. At the same time, the official will implement Verified label certification for certain projects, indicating that the project parties have communicated with the platform and demonstrated integrity, but this does not constitute an endorsement or guarantee.
Believe is also one of the new on-chain issuance platforms of Solana, but according to Dune data, the issuance of tokens on the Solana chain is still concentrated on Pump.fun, with the MemeCoin issued by Pump.fun accounting for over 90% of the entire Solana public chain.
However, in the new issuance platforms on the Solana chain, some other faces have emerged. Among these new issuance platforms, based on market capitalization, the one with the highest share is Raydium’s new issuance platform LaunchLabs, accounting for 38.1%, followed by Let’s bonk with a share of 36%, then Believe with a share of 25.8%, and Boop.fun with a share of 1%.
Figure 1 Source: analytics.topledge
At the same time, in the cumulative transaction fees of the new issuance platform, Believe ranks first, with daily cumulative transaction fees close to 15 million USD. This is closely related to the transaction fee mechanism set by Believe, and it is also one of Believe’s pain points, which we will elaborate on in detail below.
Figure 2 Source: analytics.topledge
Believe The three major pain points have triggered a trust crisis, and the lack of beneficial effects makes it difficult to drive the growth flywheel.
On the Believe platform, creators must issue tokens through a bonding curve mechanism. This means that creators need to create a token and initiate trading through the bonding curve. When the market value of the token reaches a certain standard, the token will “graduate” into a deeper liquidity pool. Beneath these mechanisms, there are also some pain points inherent to the Believe platform.
1.High transaction fees
The Believe platform enforces a 2% fee on all transactions, of which 1% is allocated to creators, 0.1% is rewarded to Scout (early token promoters), and 0.9% is owned by the platform. This rate is much higher than that of mainstream launch platforms (about 1% -1.5%), and users need to pay in both directions, and the actual burden is as high as 4%. More importantly, this model is very easy to eat away at user income when the token price fluctuates violently, which inhibits the activity of short-term trading behavior. A large number of community users have questioned whether the platform uses fees as the main source of profit, rather than really promoting a win-win situation for creators and the community.
2. The income of Token creators is unclear.
Although the platform claims that creators can earn a 1% commission on transactions, many users have found that after reaching on-chain transaction amounts of hundreds of thousands of dollars, their actual earnings are surprisingly low. One creator even exposed that after completing a transaction volume of $450,000, they only received $50 in income, far below reasonable expectations. Meanwhile, the platform lacks publicly transparent settlement documents or on-chain verifiable contracts, further undermining user trust.
3. Lack of Beneficial Effects
Many of the token creators of Believe come from Web2 and are not familiar with the concepts of Web3. Therefore, there is a common phenomenon where the token and the product are severely misaligned, and some projects even have no product at all. At the same time, Believe has also been questioned for insider trading, as there are many sniper bots targeting new token openings, with many projects buying in and issuing tokens completed in the same second and the same block, which brings no benefit to retail investors participating.
The current state of the Believe ecosystem is not optimistic, with only five projects having a market value of over ten million dollars.
After the short-term ICM narrative concept of Believe, the overall ecological heat has gradually declined. According to believescreener data, the current total market value of the platform is approximately $433 million, of which the platform coin $LAUNCHCOIN has a market value of about $242 million, accounting for 56.2% of the total market value. In addition, there are only five projects in the entire ecosystem with a market value exceeding $10 million.
![After a rapid rise to fame, Believe seeks a turnaround amid high fees and a trust crisis] ( https://img.gateio.im/social/moments-431556d4789e4c6730c5589d36ce7349)
Figure 3 Source: believescreener
These circumstances indicate that Believe still faces challenges in implementing high-quality ideas and building sustainable economic models. The current ecosystem reflects a fragile structure dominated by speculative participation. If a more stable balance cannot be found among product logic, community incentives, and traffic mechanisms, Believe may struggle to support the long-term vision of the project.
Summary
Believe focuses on the ICM narrative, becoming a frontrunner in the field. Currently, Believe has not stabilized its market share, and the official responses to some existing issues with the project have not fundamentally addressed the problems. The optimization of the token issuance mechanism also needs to be tested by the market. However, the reflections derived from the Believe phenomenon are worth our attention.
From the perspective of the introduction of the concept of Web2 to Web3, there is still money and traffic to chase in the early stage of the introduction of the concept, but in the medium and long term, most of them are a wave of heat. Whether it’s AI Agent bringing in MCP or Lanuchpad introducing ICM, there are situations where the project can’t be sustained for a long time. Perhaps, thinking a little deeper, the concept of the Web2 field itself is already very mature, is the introduction of the concept of Web3 a hype demand? Or is it only when Web3 has a wide range of practical applications that it makes more sense to introduce some mechanisms from Web2? At the current stage, investors should take an objective view of the concept introduced by this grafting.
Despite the many issues with Believe, it also reflects the genuine market demand for the innovative mechanisms of Launchpad. From Believe to the previous boop.fun, these cases indicate that if Launchpad platforms wish to continue developing, they must return to the core demands of fairness, transparency, and the interests of community users. Taking Virtuals Protocol as an example, it is precisely through continuous optimization of the user system that it can stand out and progress steadily amidst waves of narratives.
