Guest Introduction:
David Namdar (X@namdar): ** CEO of BNC, and also a co-founder of Galaxy Digital, with over ten years of experience in cryptocurrency and capital markets. He is currently the CEO of BNB Network Company (BNC), a Nasdaq-listed company, leading a digital asset treasury project centered around BNB, which is referred to as the "MicroStrategy of BNB."
CZ: ** Founder and former CEO of Binance, and one of the most influential entrepreneurs in the global cryptocurrency industry.
David: Alright, good morning, CZ. It's great to see you.
CZ: Good morning, David. It's great to see you too.
David: I'm very excited to kick off this conversation with you. We've known each other for a long time, and it's been quite a journey. The recent market has also been exciting, especially with BNB hitting new historical highs today. How are things on your end? Where are you connecting from?
CZ: Things are quite good. I'm currently in Tokyo. As you said, BNB is reaching new heights. I'm not quite sure what caused what, but I believe your efforts have certainly contributed, so thank you. Overall, everything is going well.
David: I'm glad to hear that. I want to take a moment to look back. Our journey in the crypto space has been remarkable. Back in 2017, when BNB was just launched, the wave of ICOs and utility tokens was at its peak. BNB really stood out during that time, being the first project to break the mold and was quite innovative. How do you view the evolution over these years? Did you ever think it would grow into such a thriving ecosystem?
CZ: That's a great question. Initially (in 2017), BNB was an ERC-20 token on Ethereum, just for fundraising. We knew we would develop a blockchain that was public, decentralized, etc. But I didn't actually expect it to grow into a complete ecosystem. So seeing all of this now is really a surreal feeling. To be honest, for most of the past seven or eight years, I was busy running a centralized exchange, and during that time, I didn't spend much time on the BNB chain. Over the past couple of years, I had to deal with the U.S. government, handling cases, flying to the U.S., and spending four months in jail, and so on. So we actually didn't invest much time and energy into the BNB chain during those 7-8 years. However, despite that, the community has still grown. Especially this year, we started to focus more on the BNB chain. I'm also putting more attention on the BNB chain now—since I have nothing else to do.
CZ: And you are also part of this ecosystem, which is really empowering. This year, we have seen the BNB chain truly thriving. That's a good thing. I believe that even today, the BNB chain is still "underdeveloped," and the entire ecosystem is still "underdeveloped." This means there are many opportunities for different projects to grow. Overall, I think it's fantastic.
David: Yes, I completely agree. Recently, I've been carrying the BNB flag outside and doing my best to explain to investors the difference between BNB (as an asset) and BNB Chain (the entire ecosystem), and how it has developed to no longer be tied to any single company. How do you usually explain this difference to everyone?
CZ: Yes, many people get confused because many media outlets like to refer to BNB as "Binance Coin." This has historical roots: it was indeed called that at the beginning. We later tried several times to rebrand and distinguish the two.
BNB initially had more utility on the Binance centralized exchange, but now, as you said, it has become a thriving ecosystem in its own right. BNB is a native asset on multiple blockchains, currently including BNB Smart Chain, Greenfield, opBNB, and previously the Tendermint-based BNB Beacon Chain. In the future, BNB will also be the native token of multiple blockchains that adopt newer technologies.
CZ: BNB is the token that powers the decentralized ecosystem of the BNB blockchain, and it is very different from "the token of Binance." While Binance's centralized exchange still offers fee discounts for using BNB, that is just one of many use cases. The centralized exchange also provides some yield-generating airdrop participation opportunities for BNB holders, such as Launchpad, Launchpool, Binance Alpha, etc. But again, this is just a part of BNB's utility. BNB itself is a very vibrant and large ecosystem: there are multiple DEXs, perpetual contract DEXs, lending protocols, stablecoins, and so on on the BNB blockchain. There are many, many things on the BNB blockchain. I actually find it quite difficult to explain this clearly to many people; they tend to get confused—so I think you do a better job in this regard than I do. Thank you for your help.
David: No, not at all, but thank you for the compliment. Let me tell you, one thing I'm really doing out there is providing explanations as much as possible. You know, we've talked about this many times: I've been in this field for a long time and have witnessed various evolutions. I've seen many people come and go, and I've seen iterations and innovations, especially driven by regulatory factors. Right? So for me, being able to explain how this "evolution happened," including the things you've built over the years, and you being one of the best builders in the industry, is a fantastic thing.
David: In my view, BNB is a collection of many things, and it has shown that it might be the most capable of continuous iteration and upgrading over these years. Every chain—like Ethereum—has its own roadmap, many different ideas, and visions for upgrades. We also know that Bitcoin has many "political factors" in terms of BIPs (Bitcoin Improvement Proposals), and there are many iterations. So, in a sense, BNB can be considered one of the chains that has successfully completed upgrades and evolution over these years.
CZ: Yes. I think every chain has been evolving. The BNB chain has indeed evolved more because it has developed from a Tendermint-based blockchain. It started as an ERC-20 token, then migrated to the Tendermint blockchain, became an EVM-compatible chain, and has grown into a layer (opBNB). Then we also have Greenfield (focused on storage). Now there are some new variants being considered and developed by developers. From this perspective, we have evolved more structurally. Most other blockchains start from one architecture and then maintain it; whereas from the perspective of the BNB chain, the BNB token is the native asset of multiple blockchains. The underlying technology can evolve over time.
CZ: I've discussed this several times with some core developers. They are looking at what the "next generation" will be: the next generation architecture needs to provide 100x, 1000x throughput, greater capacity and stability, lower costs, and be "fully aware of" AI and ready for AI; while also natively supporting stablecoins, RWAs, and so on. There are many related discussions. I hope our mindset, as well as the community's mindset towards BNB, is that this token will be the native coin of multiple blockchains, and the technology will continue to evolve rapidly. I hope we can achieve this together.
David: Yes, I completely agree. And a large part of this is about the community, as you mentioned. Over the years, the community has been inspired by you, as well as by the BNB Chain team and all participants. I've been observing and seeing a lot of enthusiasm from the outside. You mentioned stablecoins several times; let's delve a bit deeper. The "stablecoin story" is very timely: recently Circle went public, and with Ethereum's performance over the past few months, Wall Street and many investors are starting to realize the potential of stablecoins, and the passing of the "Genius Act" has also had an impact. I would tell everyone that, in many ways, we see very strong growth of stablecoins on the BNB chain, even surpassing Ethereum at certain stages. So how do you view the landscape of stablecoins on the BNB chain? From a global perspective, would you consider stablecoins as a kind of "ETF for the dollar"?
CZ: There is so much to discuss about stablecoins. People are now realizing that stablecoins might be one of the biggest businesses in crypto. Binance, as a centralized exchange, has a strong influence on "which projects can go live," but in terms of profitability, I believe Tether might be the most profitable company per capita in human history. For example, they earn $13-15 billion a year with about 200 employees; that's just outrageous. So now everyone wants to create stablecoins. Circle has also achieved some success. In fact, about two years ago, BUSD was halted by NYDFS, but it grew from 0 to $23 billion in two to three years; and that was during a relatively "anti-crypto" government period (the Biden administration's "war on crypto"). But USDC wasn't halted, so it continued to grow and is now publicly listed.
CZ: Now there are thousands of projects trying to create stablecoins, which is great. I think it will bring more diversity; some will offer higher yields, and some will have new features, etc. But if you really look at the landscape of stablecoins, my impression is that domestically in the U.S., there isn't as much need for stablecoins. Although today in crypto, the largest stablecoins are dollar-denominated and pegged to the dollar, in the U.S. there is ACH, and domestic transfers are relatively easy. The heavy usage of stablecoins is actually in international scenarios outside the U.S. Stablecoins help make the dollar more dominant globally; to be honest, every country wants their currency to be used more globally. For example, China's yuan also wants to become a global dominant currency, and other countries feel the same. Stablecoins are a way to achieve this. They help crypto and the blockchain industry better integrate into the traditional financial system, and they provide crypto practitioners with a stable, at least fiat-valued, value anchor in the ecosystem; which is also very helpful for various countries. So from a purely economic interest perspective, countries should encourage the development of their own stablecoins.
CZ: Back to the BNB chain ecosystem. Historically, USDT and USDC have not provided strong native support; they only recently started issuing natively. I believe Tether has not yet issued natively on the BNB chain, while Circle has started natively, but only recently. So there is a gap here, a niche that can be filled. I think USD1 has filled that gap well, and we have seen very strong growth over the past few months. So I believe stablecoins will continue to exist and will become a major player—specifically, a very large track. Looking back a few years, I didn't quite understand it myself. When we first started Binance, I was thinking: who would use stablecoins? Why not just use fiat?
But stablecoins do solve many problems: using blockchain for international transfers is much easier; blockchain has no borders, which helps keep prices synchronized between different exchanges; and it is also a more user-friendly "form of fiat." Because of this, it has grown very quickly and will continue to grow. The stablecoin track on the BNB chain still has many opportunities because it is not yet fully developed. We have seen significant growth of USD1, and I actually expect more development there.
David: Yes, I agree. This also brings us back to NYDFS. They are indeed creating problems. Even from the moment I first entered this field, New York's Bit License has been slowing down innovation—not just in New York, but across the U.S. and even globally, as many regulators look to New York's BitLicense and use it as an opportunity to slow down the development of crypto. So the "war on crypto" actually started much earlier. Now, regarding many stablecoins, I would also return to the original Tether. Tether was born out of industry demand: people were moving value between different exchanges, while the existing financial infrastructure was trying to block that. Tether played its role and grew to become what you mentioned—one of the most profitable companies in the industry and globally. As activity on the BNB chain increases, the demand for stablecoins will naturally be captured and will help support this activity.
David: Next is the area of RWA. I believe we have finally reached a turning point for RWA growth. In the past few cycles, we have seen "starts and stops": from the earliest real estate tokenization projects to some fund tokenization. But now we are indeed seeing a resurgence of many RWA activities. How do you see our current position in the RWA adoption curve? And what are some observations you have around the BNB chain?
CZ: We have been in this field for a decade, as "hardcore believers," believing that everything will be tokenized. Not just buildings, traditional money market funds, but even "people" can be tokenized; virtual things can also be tokenized. So everything can be tokenized, but tokenization is not easy. Personally, I believe that more traditional financial instruments will be tokenized first because they are more suitable for trading. For example, real estate has less price volatility and lower trading volume, so liquidity is poor. If you tokenize a building, because the price is relatively stable, the trading volume won't be large; without sufficient trading volume, people won't place large orders on the order book, and liquidity will be worse. If you want to enter or exit a few million dollars or even larger amounts, it will be difficult, and abnormal price behavior can easily occur.
CZ: Not every asset is easy to tokenize. Crypto assets, due to their high price volatility, have formed a "characteristic" that makes people more willing to trade, resulting in higher trading volumes. Additionally, when you tokenize a building, if you want to buy the entire building, you must buy all the tokens available on the market; the last few token holders may be unwilling to sell, driving the price very high. Furthermore, holding a "fraction" of a building does not necessarily mean you can live in it; in other words, how to enjoy what kind of economic usage rights and economic benefits is a concern. There are also regulatory worries: when you tokenize a building, does it count as a security? Or something else? Who will regulate it? In the U.S., this issue is particularly evident because the financial market may have multiple regulators; in other countries, this may not be a problem, but the regulatory framework is still very important—what these tokens can do and cannot do? Many questions remain unclear today.
CZ: I believe RWA will be significant and will grow. If we also consider stablecoins as RWA (many people do), it is already quite large. Other newer assets will also be interesting. But I personally think that traditional financial assets will be tokenized first, followed by more easily conceptualized and redeemable commodities (like oil, gold), and finally other things.
David: That makes a lot of sense. It's also one of the points I'm excited about in the current cycle: many crypto players are entering the traditional financial space like never before; at the same time, we are also seeing some TradFi players trying to enter the crypto market. For example, Galaxy—I believe they are one of the first, if not the first, companies to tokenize their equity recently; you should have seen the news. We will see more attempts like this. As for whether there will really be significant demand, whether people in the crypto circle will genuinely be interested in participating in the "tokenized stocks" of the traditional financial market—this remains to be seen. Now, returning to the topic of "value migrating from centralized exchanges to decentralized exchanges" and other future areas. At the recent BNB Day, you mentioned: if you were to start over, at twenty years old, you would focus on AI agents and a privacy-focused DEX. This resonated with me greatly. When you think about that critical point—I have also heard you talk about many "visions of the future," about how the crypto market is moving from centralized exchanges to DEX. How do you think this will evolve?
CZ: Of course. First, to respond to another point you mentioned: the tokenization of stocks. I believe this is the "most obvious" thing to do because which country wouldn't want their stocks to be accessible to global users? The problem is that most stocks will be classified as "securities." There are very strict laws surrounding securities in various countries (most have regulatory bodies like the SEC), and there is also some form of international SEC alliance. So now some people issuing stock tokens are trying to skip many "hoops" to separate "tokens" from "securities."
CZ: This will create problems: the token price and stock price do not synchronize, which is not right. In my view, if there is a price difference, you should buy the cheaper one and then redeem it for the more expensive one; as more people do this, the price difference will disappear. But the fact is that the price difference has always existed, indicating that the entire process has not been streamlined. By my definition, this means that this product "does not work yet." But I do believe that stock tokenization is a large market, and we need clear regulatory guidance—what can be done, what cannot be done, etc. I know many countries are piloting this, whether in the U.S., UAE, or other countries.
CZ: Back to AI. I believe AI will increase the volume of interactions by 3 to 6 orders of magnitude, say from a thousand to a million times. In the future, each of us will have thousands of agents working for us in the background. There will be agents to transcribe this content—perhaps there is already AI transcribing this podcast. I hope in the future there will be agents to edit videos, pick out highlights, help me remove wrinkles, and then post it online, monetizing it in some way. For example, people can watch the first third, and to see the remaining two-thirds, they need to pay a little, or even just a "few cents' worth." All these transactions will be "ultra-high frequency, ultra-low cost." I believe blockchain is the only solution that can handle this type of transaction. AI will significantly increase the transaction volume on the blockchain.
CZ: At the same time, blockchain can do a lot for AI: for example, "secure AI," such as privacy protection, secure training, secure data collection and usage, etc., can all be implemented using blockchain in a way that is truly user-controlled. I have also talked to some AI companies: they will use blockchain to achieve "transparency in the algorithm development process," allowing people to peek inside because right now it is just a black box. We do not know what data was used for training, but it seems that AI can provide answers. For example, if I ask AI to summarize any book—if AI has that book, I am not sure if it paid for every book; I am not sure if AI paid $10 for every existing book; if I ask it to summarize a paid webpage, AI can somehow have it. So, AI has many potential issues that can be solved by blockchain.
I again believe this is a massive industry. A better way to put it is: at least in my lifetime, there are three foundational technologies—Internet, blockchain, AI. The Internet still has many opportunities, but the latter two have just begun; both have significant growth potential, especially the latter two.
David: I completely agree. I have also spent a lot of time studying the AI market and its evolution. Last year, I was thinking about many ideas, such as establishing a bank dedicated to serving AI agents—each of us will have thousands of agents making "trillions" of transactions daily, beyond what our brains can comprehend. We need a blockchain-based, scalable ecosystem to support those activities. You also mentioned that AI cannot KYC, cannot complete account openings with exchanges and banks. So without blockchain intervention, this is impossible. Looking back to 2017-2018, I was involved in one of the earliest AI agent projects, called "Botchain," but it did not materialize. When you have unlimited, unimaginable "machine-to-machine" communication, we need to leave a trace, and these records must be verifiable and on-chain. This way, during audits, we can see: where my LLM/agent pulled data from, where yours pulled from, and what agreements they reached over a period of time.
David: Now I want to pivot back to the topic of CEX and DEX, as this is another intriguing question in the market. Looking back over the past few cycles, centralized exchanges have long been key drivers of many activities and have been many people's "first stop" in crypto. Now we see rapid growth in DEX, and I believe this is a trend we both expect to continue. How do you think this will evolve over time?
CZ: This trend is very clear. In the distant future, DEX will be larger than CEX, and this is very clear. As you said, CEX, in my view, is the "stepping stone" for people to enter the crypto world. Users coming from Web2 find it easier to get started with an email and password, with customer service and someone to help them hand-in-hand. The concept of a custodial platform is also easier to understand because it conceptually resembles a bank. But as they become more experienced, they will say: I now have my own wallet that I can manage myself, which gives me more freedom and control, but also means more responsibility (like protecting the device). Once people master these, they will turn to DEX.
CZ: Therefore, I am 100% confident that in the future, DEX will be larger than CEX. Consequently, the chain itself—the ecosystem of the chain—becomes very important. This is also why, in my view, in the long run, "the ecosystem of the chain" is far more important than any centralized exchange. In this sense, I am forced to spend less time on centralized exchanges, which is a good thing. Now I can have more time to contribute to the decentralized ecosystem. And this is actually quite fascinating because once you get used to it… I would say that for the average person, the decentralized ecosystem is still relatively difficult to use. Trading volume is increasing and is quite substantial, but for the average user, using decentralized products will show many random strings and many random numbers on the screen—what to do? Even in centralized exchanges, there are many numbers, but at least they are understandable. We need to improve the products as a community to make them better and easier to use. But "on-chain, decentralized" is definitely the future; otherwise, we wouldn't be in this industry, right?
David: This also ties into one of the points that excites me about today's market. Looking back at my career: I come from the traditional financial world, but now I am a "crypto geek" and a "lifelong cryptographer," and I will always be so. I have always tried to connect the crypto market with the capital markets: trying to create a Bitcoin ETF, getting Galaxy listed, and helping other companies go public. In every cycle, I have tried to help more people see opportunities and become a small bridge between the two markets. As for where we are today: we see a lot of activity migrating from centralized exchanges to decentralized exchanges, but at the same time, the vast majority of wealth and capital in the world is still flowing through traditional finance, through centralized exchanges and markets in the traditional world. RPC Cat Friends Club (Nine Lives Society)
David: I believe the truly massive opportunity right now is "Digital Asset Treasuries." This is an achievement that Michael Saylor has made over the past five years. In fact, I just spoke with someone else about this: Michael Saylor hasn't always been a Bitcoin believer. In contrast, you and I have been waving the Bitcoin flag since we entered this field, while also doing our best to promote BNB and have always been long-term believers. I often tell people: you might be one of the few I've seen in the industry who can help everyone step back and stay focused during every fluctuation—"Focus on holding your bids, don't get shaken out by volatility." Volatility is a "characteristic," especially when you are in a rapidly growing asset class. With the improvement of the regulatory environment and the increasing awareness of the potential and value of digital assets among investors, I feel that Saylor has been ahead of the curve, leading the trend; along with Simon from Japan's Metaplanet, and now David Bailey and Anthony Pompliano, many people are waving the Bitcoin flag, helping others understand how these assets can enter the balance sheets of governments and enterprises as unique assets.
David: I am also very excited to share the story of BNB, illustrating how special and unique an asset it is. Based on this, whether as an investor or as a CEO operating an industry-leading digital asset treasury company, I see a demand: we must focus on a few truly special and unique crypto assets because not all crypto assets are the same. You and I are both very clear about BNB—there is something special about it. Over the past few months, it has indeed outperformed Bitcoin; from the beginning, it has been one of the few assets that can outperform Bitcoin. When you think about digital asset treasuries and the new wave, how do you see this market and the opportunities within it?
CZ: There are many aspects to unpack here. First, back to the starting point: humans like to understand things through "classification," finding it easier; for example, "traditional finance vs. Web3" or "Web2 vs. Web3." But in reality, there are no boundaries: ultimately, it is all finance, just using different technologies. Traditional finance can completely utilize blockchain technology; banks can use blockchain technology.
Crypto companies should also deeply integrate with traditional financial markets and market structures. We should not draw lines to separate them but should fully integrate—terminology is just to help people understand better. In this sense, crypto companies should tap into existing markets (raising funds, finding developers, obtaining resources), and existing financial markets should also use new technologies.
CZ: Regarding Michael Saylor, my intuition is that he probably started becoming active in the public eye around 2017-2018, maybe even earlier. Once he understands, he has a very strong conviction. We have also experienced this: first learning, then "transitioning" or "fully converting," becoming steadfast believers, allowing us to navigate through volatility because we can see a longer-term future—not the prices of tomorrow or the day after (which are unpredictable), but the trends five or ten years down the line. This is interesting. Saylor invented a new structure; he has indeed tried to explain this at different times, but I didn't fully understand it, yet I pay my respects to him. This new structure allows crypto companies to raise money from traditional markets. The traditional market is larger, and many investors can buy company stocks but cannot directly buy crypto; being able to buy stocks that are "indirectly related to crypto" provides a convenient entry point into Web3. Once they have this indirect exposure, they will continue to pay attention to crypto and help the ecosystem grow.
CZ: In this regard, Saylor has created one of the most successful companies in the world using a very simple strategy. Although he is a hardcore fan (a Bitcoin Maxi, only looking at Bitcoin), there are also many other very successful cryptocurrencies, including BNB and many other public chains. From Binance's (the centralized exchange's) success: if it only listed Bitcoin, it would not be as successful; it is precisely because it listed various assets that it attracted a large number of users into crypto. You and I both agree that BNB performs strongly and has many use cases. We are at the intersection you mentioned: connecting traditional finance with Web3 finance. Tools like DAT allow crypto companies to access traditional market capital while enabling traditional markets to participate in crypto, which is a win-win situation. The more people who come into contact with BNB or other crypto assets (whether directly or indirectly), the greater their contribution to the crypto ecosystem.
CZ: This is something that is "extremely beneficial for both sides": once companies or investors gain indirect exposure to BNB, they may recommend it to friends; if they know developers, they might say, "Why not develop your protocol on BNB?" "Why not use BNB for this?" "Why not use another crypto asset for that?" This will help the ecosystem grow. An important point is that in the decentralized world, it is not driven by a single company or person. I am not "driving" everything about BNB; I do what I need to do, but I do not manage everyone in the ecosystem, and they do not report to me.
The more people tie their incentives to the ecosystem, the more they will contribute, which in turn helps everyone in the ecosystem. Even in a decentralized world, if we can help more people form "mutual symbiosis," it will also drive ecosystem growth. So I think this is a wonderful thing: Michael Saylor has blazed a trail, and now we are adopting it, and you are leading the charge, which is fantastic.
David: Thank you for your recognition. As we have discussed in various crypto cycles, this can be seen as a path that was not anticipated at the beginning. You have spent a lot of time communicating with governments and company leaders around the world. We envisioned early on that one day governments would buy Bitcoin, Ethereum, BNB, and other digital assets. But we did not realize that there could also be a "corporate form" whose goal is to maximize "the amount of Bitcoin or BNB corresponding to each share," accumulating these assets to become very large holders; this provides investors with an incredible way to gain exposure to these assets and the ecosystem. More importantly, as you mentioned: by gaining this exposure, people will gradually delve deeper into the ecosystem, which will create a special "flywheel."
David: I often cite the example of El Salvador (the trip we took together a few years ago). El Salvador did something special: they adopted Bitcoin to "go global." From the perspective of "actually holding Bitcoin," they also received good returns on the dollars they invested; but the greater return was "putting themselves on the map," making themselves famous. They attracted entrepreneurs, developers, and investors from around the world. When 10,000, 20,000, or 100,000 people enter a small country, the compounding effect of scale can fundamentally change that country's trajectory in a generation. We see similar phenomena around the world: as long as a country opens up regulations, attracts innovators, entrepreneurs, and capital, and opens its doors to crypto, it will ultimately reap more and more dividends over time.
CZ: Absolutely. I completely agree. Before Michael Saylor, if someone had told me "you can create a public company to buy crypto assets," I would have thought it was too crazy: how could that work? This also reflects my insufficient understanding of the public market and traditional markets—despite having worked in fintech for many years, I have never operated a public company, so I didn't understand.
Saylor clearly has more experience; he figured it out. Then El Salvador is also interesting: this is a case with very clear leadership—President Bukele. Without his push, we wouldn't have gone there (why would I go there?);
If it weren't for his push, Binance wouldn't have set up a customer service office there, etc. I think this is a classic case: a country that quickly or sufficiently early adopts new technology can gain greater dividends.
CZ: Looking at the UAE, the UAE has always been "crypto-friendly, AI-friendly," attracting many new entrepreneurs. The UAE does not have many natural resources—there is oil, but not much else; it is a desert. But now there is a world-class, prosperous city (or two) there. Everyone loves it; the economy is performing well, and the country is growing rapidly. I believe that those countries that adopt technology in the early stages and in the right way will grow very quickly. This brings us back to the innovations we see: RWA, AI, etc. If a country can adopt these new things, the economy will continue to grow.
David: I also like such examples. The achievements the UAE has made in 10-20 years are quite remarkable; growth is indeed compounding. As a closing thought, if we talk about your vision for BNB and the entire crypto ecosystem in the next 10-20 years: how do you see the "possibilities and potential"? How would you measure "success"?
CZ: My perspective is: how many people can we help with BNB? Many companies do not focus on poor countries or underdeveloped countries, such as Africa or Southeast Asia, because the ROI is not obvious right now. But if you look at Binance (the company, not the BNB chain), today there are many users in Africa, and these users currently bring in very little revenue; I believe that ten years from now, they will bring in a lot of revenue, and there will be no one else there. We help them first by allowing them to access finance; subsequently, they will reap the rewards, and the platform will also be compensated appropriately, which is a win-win situation.
CZ: For BNB, the opportunities are even greater because it is a decentralized, open network and protocol. What I want to do is bring the next several hundred million people into the next wave, providing them with the next stage of new financial technology—"the next generation of new financial technology." As the world's population is likely to continue growing, we should empower 10 billion or more people by providing them with financial services. That is the goal I have in mind. It is not a price target, nor is it about competing with or surpassing Bitcoin or other public chains. As you said, BNB has indeed outperformed Bitcoin historically, which is remarkable and challenging; but I believe that is not the correct "benchmark." The correct "benchmark" is: as a community, how many people can we help? The more people we help, the more people join the community, which is a self-reinforcing phenomenon. We should continue to do this.
David: I think that is a beautiful answer, thank you. Every time I try to keep everyone in the right mindset: focus on the long term, focus on building, focus on helping others. This is a beautiful vision. RPC Cat Friends Club (Nine Lives Society)
CZ: Exactly. I think you have that mindset. You are one of the best personalities I have encountered in the industry; you have been in this industry for a long time and have a strong sense of mission. So when you say you are willing to take the lead, we are all very happy. Whether you need my personal help, YZi Labs, or support from any of our affiliated companies or teams, we are happy to provide support. At the same time, we are also very willing to seek help from other participants in the ecosystem or those outside the BNB chain ecosystem.
CZ: I believe it is very important to have the entire ecosystem collaborate together and grow the ecosystem, which will benefit everyone.
David: Absolutely. This has always been my way of doing things: collaboration. I also like to tell everyone that I have defined "why I love crypto": it is the "most non-zero-sum game" in the world. Good participants are all working hard to increase market share. In fact, there is one more point I want to summarize: think about the "next billion, the next two billion" people; they will only live in a world where crypto becomes increasingly important. This is a beautiful future vision.
CZ: Absolutely, absolutely.
David: CZ, it is my honor. This conversation has been very enjoyable, thank you; it has been a great discussion.
CZ: Great, thank you very much.
David: See you soon.
Text organized by: RPC Cat Friends Club (Nine Lives Society)
h#ps://www.readyplayerclub.com/
h#ps://x.com/rpcn7club
Original interview video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JZz1IRkLcbw
David J. Namdar: h#ps://x.com/namdare
免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。
