After reading so much about DeFi pioneer AC @AndreCronjeTech's new project @flyingtulip_, I feel like everyone's been completely taken aback by the explosive news of $200M raised at a $1B valuation. After all, Flying Tulip's Ponzi-like name and the curse of high FDV VC coins are enough to pique everyone's interest. But what's the real logic behind this massive funding round? Here's my personal take: 1) AC has regained its former reputation as a leading DeFi innovator. When talking about AC, we should temporarily forget the downfall of the @SonicLabs chain. Its true appeal lies in its definition of the DeFi innovation paradigm, which is also the reason behind its high valuation. Flying Tulip is, by definition, a full-stack DeFi exchange, encompassing spot trading, futures, options, lending, derivatives, and more. It sounds like a combination of the functionality of Uniswap, AAVE, GMX, and others. Oh, another patchwork quirk? No, this product's innovation lies in the full integration of functions within a single liquidity pool. Previously, users needed to switch between multiple DeFi protocols, but Flying Tulip can now simultaneously fulfill these needs, including providing liquidity, collateralized lending, and leveraging. This is undoubtedly the result of the simultaneous maturation of the integration logic of chain infrastructure, DeFi applications, and financial services. Will it fail like previous AC projects like Keep3r and Solidly? However, its liquidity aggregation feature arrives at the perfect time. 2) The "put option" addresses the pain points of the VC coin model. I've seen many interpret Flying Tulip's perpetual put option as "capital preservation," which is superficial. The underlying mechanism is a game-playing mechanism designed into the DeFi financing system, and this is where the courage to make a $200 million gamble comes from. The Achilles' heel of traditional VC coins lies in the structural unfairness of profit distribution. Institutions buy at low prices and lock up their positions for long periods of time. By the time retail investors are eligible to buy, the institutional coins have also begun to unlock, effectively forcing retail investors to pay for the institutional profits. Flying Tulip's put options are a game-changer. Investors are given 100% of their stake first, with zero lock-up. Isn't that radical? Holding FT tokens guarantees principal protection. Investors can redeem their staked stablecoins and crypto assets at any time (at the expense of a small opportunity cost). Alternatively, if they sell their FT tokens, the staked principal will automatically be transferred to the foundation for a buyback and destruction (forfeiting the principal). In essence, Flying Tulip has become a self-sustaining DeFi hedge fund: investors contribute principal to the pool, while the project earns its keep with the stable interest. The speculative buying and selling of FT tokens in the market becomes a growth flywheel driven by continuous token buybacks, fueling deflation. In simple terms, the project's original biggest selling pressure is transformed into a buyback incentive, forcing investors to hold onto their shares. 3) Capital structure innovation is used to accelerate product PMF implementation. Having explained the innovative mechanism above, you can immediately see the flaw: if investors collectively exercise their options, will the project be doomed? That's true, but if the product takes off, transaction fee income will provide ongoing additional buyback support, putting the token into a positive growth cycle. Again, this is a game-theoretic innovation, not a simple functional improvement. In my opinion, this is the real strength of AC, a new product. Why do most current projects inevitably fail? It's because pure governance token mechanisms fail before the product reaches product-market fit (PMF). Coupled with the market's consistent pursuit of profit, most products fail. Flying Tulip, on the other hand, provides a sound path for project development by locking in low, deterministic returns in a DeFi pool (a $1B pool generating $40M at a 4% annualized rate is enough to support 5-10 years of slow-paced development). Whether the project will quickly wither or rapidly grow is left to the market to determine. (AC's biggest problem is its lackluster performance. Well, if it doesn't, it's not AC's fault this time 😳) The question is, will all future DeFi projects follow suit? Perhaps the answer is too early. The key to Flying Tulip's innovative financing model lies in AC: sufficient capital must be injected into the capital pool in the early stages (to ensure interest covers costs), sufficient technological innovation must be driven in the mid-term (to ensure product growth), and finally, the token must have sufficient secondary market trading support (trading volume and liquidity are its lifeblood). Regardless, in my opinion, Flying Tulip's innovation represents a bold shift in Crypto's financing model and will be AC's culmination in the DeFi world! However, given the precedents of Keep3r's failed end and Solidly's abrupt demise, we'll have to wait and see whether Flying Tulip ultimately proves AC's redemption, or another example of a late-stage failure.