2026-01-22 08:23:41

Don't keep staring at those TPS benchmark numbers all day; that stuff simply doesn't impress business people.

Look at it from another angle: if you were the CFO of Coca-Cola or Nike, would you move your core business to a chain that handles "transfer 1 dollar today, transfer 300 dollars tomorrow"? No. Because that makes financial planning impossible.

Recently, many people have asked, why can Vanar attract giants like Google, NVIDIA, and Worldpay to get involved? The logic is straightforward—Vanar isn't trying to compete with other public chains on "extreme speed." Vanar's goal is simple: to make Web3 understandable for large companies.

**Cost issues are solved**
Other chains are playing with "dynamic fees," but Vanar offers "fixed costs." No matter how congested the network gets, the fee structure remains clear. For enterprises, this is what enables decision-making. Certainty is more valuable than speed.

**ESG risks are avoided**
Which big company isn't talking about environmental protection? Using outdated public chains that consume a lot of electricity can quickly lead to being criticized by environmental organizations and trending on hot searches. Vanar, based on Google Cloud's green computing power, directly supports carbon neutrality. For CEOs, it's like buying insurance.

**AI is no longer a hollow promise**
Vanar's AI engine is already being applied in real-world scenarios, not just a concept used to hype trading signals. This is what enterprise-grade applications should look like.

VANRY-1,04%

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.

21 Likes

Reward
21
8
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

CodeSmellHunter

· 01-24 10:33

That's right, those who only boast about TPS should wake up already. --- The fixed costs really hit the core; the finance department is just used to this. --- Haha, finally someone explained it thoroughly. Speed is definitely not what businesspeople need. --- I laughed at the ESG part; the insurance analogy was excellent. --- Carbon neutrality is indeed a barrier for large companies; otherwise, they would easily be criticized. --- AI engine deployment is truly valuable; those armchair projects should have quieted down long ago. --- Enterprise-level applications mean exactly that; they're not for retail investors.

View OriginalReply0

AirdropHunterZhang

· 01-24 05:12

Ha, this fixed cost setup is indeed perfect. When I was arbitraging before, I was worried about sudden fee hikes that would wipe out the account... I understand Vanar's logic; companies just accept this. Projects that cut leeks play tricks, while those that quietly make big money are actually straightforward and brutal. The ESG part is also clever, taking a one-step approach to shut the CEO's mouth. Just want to know how the payback period looks this time; green computing power also requires money to invest...

View OriginalReply0

AltcoinTherapist

· 01-22 22:16

Enterprise-level applications are the long-term winners, not just hype.

View OriginalReply0

RugDocDetective

· 01-22 08:53

Honestly, TPS has been outdated for a long time, and it's a bit embarrassing that the crypto world is still hyping it up. Fixed costs are indeed a major point; big enterprises rely on this approach. What large companies value is stability, not flashy technology. That's the real difference. I agree with Vanar's logic, but it still depends on how far it can actually be implemented. Environmental protection is definitely a major trend; ignoring it will cause more trouble later. Enterprise-level applications should have thought this way long ago; those previous public chains were too naive. Speed is sufficient as long as it's fast enough; the key is controllable costs. I totally agree with this point. But I still want to see supporting data in the future; I hope it's not just a PPT project.

View OriginalReply0

QuorumVoter

· 01-22 08:53

Honestly, this is the right approach. Certainty is indeed much more important than speed. --- Haha, finally someone explains this thoroughly. Who believes in TPS number games? --- The fixed cost aspect is excellent; companies are just used to this model. --- I have to admit that green computing power is indeed very attractive to large companies. ESG is not just a slogan. --- Wait, is it really just because of these that Google and NVIDIA entered the market, or is there something else? --- Compared to those flashy speed metrics, this pragmatic approach is truly more appealing to capital. --- Certainty is more appealing than speed, there's no doubt about that. --- No hype, no blackening; enterprise-level applications just have to be done this way.

View OriginalReply0

rugpull_ptsd

· 01-22 08:52

Well said, finally someone has pierced through this window paper Enterprise-level applications must emphasize certainty, otherwise the finance department simply can't pass This is what big companies truly care about The fixed cost strategy is indeed brilliant, saving from being cut by transaction fees every day Google and NVIDIA have both entered, indicating that this path is the right one Compared to boasting about TPS, it's better to focus on solid fundamentals The previous approach was really just self-indulgence, now we've realized ESG is indeed a necessity, not just empty talk Not racing for speed, but winning through wisdom

View OriginalReply0

GasGuzzler

· 01-22 08:46

That's right, TPS is just a numbers game; big companies don't buy into that at all. Fixed costs are indeed tough; being able to accurately calculate the accounts is the key. Google and NVIDIA have both entered the market, which shows they have indeed solved real problems. I hadn't thought about ESG before; no wonder big companies care about it. Practical AI applications are truly valuable; I'm tired of concept coins. I agree with this logic; certainty is really much more valuable than speed.

View OriginalReply0

LucidSleepwalker

· 01-22 08:39

That's right, TPS is just a tool to fool retail investors; real businesspeople don't buy into that at all. Fixed costs are indeed a tough point; the CFO's biggest fear is uncontrollable costs. Vanar's move directly solves this core issue for companies. Google and NVIDIA are both in? Then I need to reevaluate this chain; projects that are just hype can't achieve this. Haha, it really is. The selling point of green computing power is now too important for big companies. A single chain has become an ESG compliance tool. Web3 really needs an enterprise-friendly version—stop with all these flashy things. The actual AI implementations are still those few real projects; most are just air. I need to keep an eye on Vanar. Certainty > speed. This should have become an industry consensus long ago, but unfortunately, some people are still competing over TPS.

View OriginalReply0