Many people are still judging Plasma with outdated perspectives: TPS, ecosystem activity, and how it compares to other L1 blockchains. This approach is flawed. It never intended to be a general-purpose public chain; its sole goal is to become the clearing layer for stablecoins. It's not just about showing a successful transfer; it's about the settlement layer where money is truly irreversible, auditable, and reusable. Currently, on-chain stablecoins are essentially substitutes for real US dollars. When used for payments, clearing, and fund allocation, any friction becomes an enemy. Gas fees, confirmation delays, and uncertainty are all costs. Plasma's entire design revolves around reducing these costs to near zero: zero gas for USDT transfers, stablecoins prioritize fee payments, and sub-second finality. These aren't marketing tactics; they are essential conditions for "money to truly flow." When stablecoin competition shifts to flow rate rather than stock, metrics like TPS become obsolete. The real key is how many "determined settlements" occur on your chain per unit of time. Whoever controls settlement holds the pricing power. Plasma may seem unassuming, but it's like a component meticulously crafted for financial settlement. So don't get hung up on whether it's L1 or not. The real question is: if stablecoins truly require a dedicated clearing layer in the future, will it be Plasma? $XPL is essentially an option, betting that clearing will evolve from an auxiliary function to infrastructure. Are you willing to pay for that probability? Early positioning is key to profit. $XPL #Plasma @Plasma