《区块链一百人》特邀李加一：穿越熊市，真正稀缺的是增长的人才

On August 12, Binance Square's "Blockchain 100" livestream interviewed Y Strategy founder Li Jiayi, who shared her eight years of market growth experience in the crypto space. She candidly described herself as someone who "accepts her fate," preferring "small and beautiful" endeavors—whether running a fund or providing services, she insists on not overreaching, because truly good projects are scarce and clients need deep, long-term support.

Li Jiayi disagrees with the notion that "AI will replace agencies." She believes software is just a tool—tools will eventually become commoditized—and what's truly scarce is "the person holding the ladle": someone who genuinely understands the market, can craft strategy, and oversee execution. She also warned that the biggest growth trap today is "blind advertising." In an era where non-human traffic has already surpassed human traffic, KOL placements without a strategy are simply burning money.

When asked why she's betting on Binance Square, she noted that the real users interested in crypto are all on Binance, and Square and the Binance community were purpose-built for crypto users—their DNA is fundamentally different. As an investor, she offered a somewhat "metaphysical" set of criteria: fate, luck, and three genes a founder must possess.

Key Quotes

Choosing "Small and Beautiful"

"I'm quite accepting of fate, and I really love small and beautiful things. When running the fund, our focus was on not investing in too many projects—there simply aren't that many good projects in the market, and with too many, you can't manage or serve them well."

"When providing services, you first need to recognize the project team's fundamental value. If I don't believe in the company myself, I can't fabricate something I can't even convince myself of and sell it to the market. Knowing which money to make and which not to make—that's enough."

Not Software, but Services

"The barrier today is no longer technology or product—ideas are even less valuable because everyone can think of them. What ultimately determines success or failure is distribution."

"Software is just a tool—good tools will all be adopted. But who holds the ladle, who uses it well, that's what matters most. Give someone a match, and without a skilled cook, you won't get a good meal."

Growth Tactics That Stopped Working

"The most useless thing is blind advertising and burning money. A client came with a million-dollar budget, and I told them they didn't need to spend that much—it's wasteful. Reducing the budget also cuts my service fee, but putting money where it matters is what's truly valuable."

"Since May this year, non-human traffic on social media has surpassed human traffic. Projections say that in five years, human traffic will be less than one-thousandth of AI's. Fewer human users mean advertising gets more expensive. Without strategy, every dollar spent is wasted."

The Growth Value of Binance Square

"There are fewer and fewer people on Twitter, less desire to express, and more AI-generated content. Where are these users? They're actually all on Binance—every trader interested in crypto is on Binance."

"Discord was originally built for gaming; project teams just adopted it for community management. But Binance Square and the Binance community were purpose-built for crypto users—the DNA is completely different. The product still has a lot of room to grow, but iteration can close the gap—Discord wasn't built in a day either."

Traits of Successful Project Teams

"As an investor, I feel it's quite metaphysical. After looking at the background, the track, and market sensitivity, you still need one more thing—whether this person has good fortune. I've invested in projects where people worked extremely hard, did the right things, had great values—but they always fell just a little short of luck at the most critical moments."

"Project teams that are likely to succeed share a few genes: First, they're not off-putting—not about being handsome or pretty, but having an aura that doesn't repel people. Second, humility—believing you're not full yet, still able to take things in, listen, and improve. Third, their worldview—how they see the world shapes their judgment at the most crucial junctures."

"If all three are present, and the person is smart and genuinely willing to put in the effort, even if what they're building now isn't great, they'll iterate and find ways to improve. So they survive, and eventually succeed."

After All These Pivots, How Does She Make Decisions?

Host Beca: Let's talk about your journey of choices and pivots. You've turned several times—from entrepreneurship to joining Binance, and now as a founder doing investment and strategy services. Do you think you're just bold, or do you have your own decision-making framework?

Li Jiayi: I feel I've grown a lot over the past three years and become much more grounded. I used to believe that anything I set my mind to, I could definitely accomplish. A lot of it comes down to serendipity—or suddenly thinking, "Oh, this seems interesting, let me try it." I'm also grateful that many people have supported me, based on our past working relationships. They trust me and have kept supporting me.

So compared to most people, my barrier to entrepreneurship was honestly not that high. But the state you're in after you start something depends entirely on your own capability.

My company hasn't grown very large. I'm quite accepting of fate—I really love small and beautiful things. When I ran the fund, our focus was on not investing in too many projects. We felt the market didn't have that many good projects to invest in anyway, and with too many, you can't manage or serve them well.

That's even more true with services now. When a project team needs market services, we first need to fundamentally recognize their baseline value. Otherwise, it's like promoting a company you don't believe in—I couldn't stand up and fabricate a story for the market that I don't endorse myself. I can't convince myself.

With that baseline, knowing which money to make and which not to make—that's enough.

Why Transition from Traditional Agency to AI?

Host Beca: The market has cooled considerably over the past two years. Many agencies used to rely on promoting project teams, KOLs, and media for growth. But now many firms are pivoting—either into AI-driven GEO or scaling back their business. Can you introduce to everyone what the biggest difference is between this transition of yours and your past agency model?

Li Jiayi: It's actually not a pivot, just an evolution of marketing approach. We changed the name because the old one was terrible—it wasn't deliberately chosen, just a name someone else wasn't using and offered to me. I said OK, I'll take it. Since we're a B2B services company, we don't need to promote to end consumers, so I didn't care.

But later, the old name, XDO, just didn't look like a services firm. Or our overseas clients would hear it and think it sounded unprofessional. So we decided on Y Strategy, which also reflects our philosophy. After all these years of service, we've found that asking "why" is crucial. Plus, my name is Jiayi, and "一" (one) starts with the letter Y in pinyin.

What we're doing now, I believe, is the right strategy. We only serve one or two clients at a time because marketing is something you must pour your heart and time into. The modern marketing landscape is highly fragmented—you simply don't have the bandwidth to serve many clients simultaneously. Fortunately, this strategy is particularly well-suited to the current bear market. I've always been about deep, long-term partnership in market strategy.

Host Beca: I recently came across a viewpoint that I think you'd resonate with, Jiayi. It said the next wave of AI entrepreneurship might not be building software, but rebuilding services companies—where previously you sold tools, now you sell outcomes. What do you think? Could agencies actually gain new opportunities because of AI?

Li Jiayi: This is something I've been thinking about and experimenting with all year. But I do agree with not building software. I previously wanted to create an English-learning AI software. I believe the barrier is no longer technology or product—or even who comes up with the idea. Ideas are worthless because everyone thinks of them. What ultimately determines success or failure is distribution.

We're seeing software customer acquisition costs rise every single year, to the point where they've inverted. A paying user's acquisition cost is roughly equivalent to two years of their total spending with you—it's extremely high.

Exchanges are the exception, of course—exchanges make a lot of money.

Software is just a tool—it depends on who wields it. If a company doesn't need very basic services but rather someone who truly understands the market to craft strategy, oversee execution, and iterate—they may lack people who know how to use fire properly, who know how to cook. Give them a match, and without a skilled cook, even if a decent meal comes out, it'll be far from what someone experienced could make.

Software is a tool, and tools get commoditized—good tools all get adopted. But who holds the ladle, who wields it well—that's what truly matters.

After Years in Growth, Which "Effective Tactics" Are Already Obsolete?

Host: Having served so many project teams and done growth for so many years, are there things you consider critical that you wouldn't normally proactively share with project teams? For instance, some growth tactics that clients still rely on but you know are essentially useless—or projects that spend fortunes on growth without seeing any actual results. Are there pitfalls you only understood after falling into them yourself?

Li Jiayi: It's blind advertising—wasting money. When it comes to market spend, if I see anything I consider unreasonable or wasteful, I tell the client very clearly. One client came with a million-dollar budget, and I told them they didn't need to spend that much—it would be wasteful. So we reduced the budget. That means my service fee shrinks too, but I believe it's a very valuable thing to do. Money should be spent where it counts—it's not about indiscriminate cutting.

What's also highly ineffective is randomly doing KOL placements. Especially in today's environment. Just a couple of days ago, there was a research report—and Elon Musk seemed to endorse the view yesterday too. The data shows that since May this year, non-human traffic on social media has surpassed human traffic. The report projects that five years from now, human traffic will be less than one-thousandth of AI's. Fewer human users mean advertising gets progressively more expensive. So without a strategy, every placement is wasting money. You need to know exactly what every penny you spend is doing.

Why Does Binance Square's Growth Value Matter More Now?

Host: You're now helping clients with project operations and devoting a significant portion of your efforts to Binance Square. Your community hit nearly 5,000 members within two days. Why did you choose Binance Square at this point?

Li Jiayi: Actually 10,000—5,000 in Chinese and 5,000 in English. It's really 10,000 total. And I'm just one person—I don't really want more people joining because it might get chaotic.

As for Binance Square, I'd been thinking about it for a while. Paid traffic was feeling less and less cost-effective—where are the users? If you ask "why" about advertising: why spend on ads? It's to find users who best match the project team, make them understand what you do, and then potentially guide them through your campaigns, spiritual or material rewards, to drive the behavioral outcomes you want. I believe that's one of the fundamental logics of marketing.

Look at Twitter now—fewer people, less desire to express, more AI-generated content. Real humans are opening Twitter less frequently. So where are these users? They're actually on Binance. Because all traders interested in crypto are on Binance.

Twitter and Square are in the same category; Binance has its own community. Discord and Telegram are another category. Discord wasn't built as a community product for financial services—it was made for gaming. It just happens that many project founders discovered it worked well for community management and adopted it. But Binance Square and the Binance community were purpose-built for crypto users.

Of course, from my experience, the product still has significant room for improvement. But its DNA is fundamentally different. I believe that once the product and technology direction are clear, adding manpower and iterating step by step will close the gaps—because Discord wasn't built in a day either, right?

So I think being among the earliest to build out Binance Square—the Twitter equivalent—and the community properly, testing what formats users love and what's efficient for project teams, is absolutely worth trying.

When Investing, Do You Bet on the Person, the Product, or the Timing?

Host: Now standing from an investor's perspective, when a project is presented to you, what's the first thing you look at? Is it the founder, the product, the data, the market—or whether they've caught the right timing?

Li Jiayi: I feel that being an investor is quite metaphysical. When I first started investing, I'd look at the founder's background, the track, what they were trying to build, whether it could succeed, whether the track had a future. Plus market sensitivity—I'd assess whether the market would buy in. Because if you build something the market doesn't buy into, you've made a product nobody uses. You pitch a narrative or direction, but if users don't engage, that's awkward.

But now, I believe you need one more factor: whether this person has good fortune. Luck is actually quite important. Among the projects I've invested in, there are those where founders worked incredibly hard, did the right things, had solid values, great backgrounds and abilities. Yet they always fell just a little short on luck at the most critical junctures, which affected the final outcome. So a person's fate is genuinely significant.

Based on my investing experience, which project teams have a higher probability of success? They share a few genes. First, they're not off-putting. This is very important. It's not about being handsome or pretty—they simply don't repel people. I think it comes down to aura and similar intangibles. That's the first point.

Second: humility. I've met many people who think highly of themselves, and also some who are truly impressive yet very humble. The more humble you are—maintaining a state of not believing you're full, still able to take things in, listen, and improve—the better positioned you are.

Third: their understanding of the world. What's their worldview? How do they see the world? This shapes their judgment at the most important decision points.

If all three are present, and the person is smart and genuinely willing to put in the effort—even if what they're building now isn't great, they'll iterate and find ways to improve. So they can survive, and eventually succeed.