Why Two Crypto Offerings?

Much time was spent deliberating on whether to create one or two offerings. While the potential benefits of having only one offering are apparent, the eventual decision to have two was primarily based on the following elements:


The two projects are very different from one another. Even in multiple formats, SELF is far from being the ecosystem of applications and connectivity that ENTIRETY aspires to be. Due to this, SELF is significantly faster to bring to market, whereas ENTIRETY has a far longer timeframe.


Two distinct offerings enable far greater flexibility regarding project utility and token/coin usage. If these were one offering, the requirement would be to unify the differences somehow, likely at the expense of some beneficial characteristics that set them apart.


Some people will relate more to one or the other offering. For those attracted to fundamental, industry-shifting improvement, ENTIRETY may have more resonance than those drawn to SELF. Equally, those interested in tokens exclusively and who don't resonate as much with Layer-1 blockchain-based operating systems may find SELF more attractive.


For those who resonate with both offerings, the opportunity is to get involved in both - either as an investor, influencer, or user in any capacity. There will be many benefits for backing both projects, including interoperability and beneficial staking rewards. The separation of the offerings is a feature, not a flaw, and intentional rather than accidental. The upside of having both in somewhat parallel forms will be demonstrated progressively over time, and in hindsight, we suspect it will become obvious.

Last updated

© Next Ideas SEZC 2024