strcUSX is live in @solsticefi YieldVault. The source is STRC. > Strategy pays around 12% cash dividend. > Solstice takes that stream onchain and splits it into 2 tranches. Senior gets paid first. Target is around 7%. Junior is first loss. Target is around 20%. The key part is the buffer. Junior is sized roughly to match senior. So STRC needs to fall about 50% before senior principal starts taking pressure. Not risk free. But the risk is much easier to price. I like this structure because the yield source is not the same as eUSX.

strcUSX is live in YieldVault. It takes Strategy’s STRC dividend stream and brings it onchain through Solstice. STRC pays around 12%. strcUSX splits it: Senior gets paid first and targets ~7%. Junior takes first-loss risk and targets ~20%, variable. Simple structure. Same cash flow. Different risk. I’m watching deposits here. The key number is not only APY. It is how much real yield can move through Solana over time.

Most marketing teams don’t have a growth problem. They have an order problem. Let me explain it, most marketing teams do this backwards. They start with content. Then campaigns. Then paid ads. And only after that they ask why growth is weak. The issue is not execution speed. It is execution without strategy. A clean marketing flow should look like this: Strategy first. ICP. Market problem. Value prop. Positioning. Messaging. Then tactics. Channels. Campaigns. Priorities. KPIs. Then implementation. Content. Ads. Tracking. Optimization. The order matters. Strategy → Tactics → Implementation → Results But results are not the end. They are feedback. Every campaign gives data on what the market cares about, what language converts, and where demand is forming. That feedback should improve the strategy again. I think this is where modern search intelligence becomes useful. Not as another tactic. As a way to see market demand before spending budget on the wrong execution.

KOL rounds always look different at the top $5k turns into millions on paper everyone thinks they caught the perfect deal on lab:native then vesting ends > liquidity is gone > attention is gone > and the real value is way lower that’s the problem with these rounds The headline return is not the return you actually get paper gains don’t matter much If you can’t exit anywhere close to them

Most teams don’t have a marketing problem. They have an input problem. I keep seeing the same 5 patterns: “We need a marketer” Then the JD says: > strategy > content > social > SEO > ads > CRM > events > website > leads That is not a role. That is a department compressed into 1 person. Before hiring, define the business problem. Demand gen is different from brand. Lifecycle is different from content. Product marketing is different from paid acquisition. “We need more leads” Usually this means nothing yet. More than what? 100 per month or 1,000? Which segment? At what CAC? What conversion rate? What happens after the form is filled? A lead target without funnel math is just a wish. “We need to be everywhere” LinkedIn X TikTok newsletter SEO events podcasts community Presence is not strategy. If your buyers make decisions in 2 places, start with those 2. Distribution should follow customer behavior. Not competitor anxiety. “Marketing isn’t working” Based on what? Pipeline? Sales velocity? Conversion? Retention? Brand search? Website intent? You can’t fix marketing by blaming marketing. You need to diagnose the full funnel. “We need a new strategy” Sometimes you don’t. Sometimes the strategy was fine. The execution was just inconsistent for 6 months. My default view: marketing gets easier when the business is clear on what it wants marketing to solve. Not “do marketing.” Solve a specific constraint.

I like the discussion here. strcUSX is easier to reason about when you reduce it to the flow. USX gets STRC yield exposure through @solsticefi. Not a vague incentive loop. There is an asset. There is cash flow. And there is a link back to Strategy’s BTC balance sheet thesis. I’m looking at it less like “high APY” and more like structured access to STRC yield.

strcUSX is live in @solsticefi YieldVault. The source is STRC. > Strategy pays around 12% cash dividend. > Solstice takes that stream onchain and splits it into 2 tranches. Senior gets paid first. Target is around 7%. Junior is first loss. Target is around 20%. The key part is the buffer. Junior is sized roughly to match senior. So STRC needs to fall about 50% before senior principal starts taking pressure. Not risk free. But the risk is much easier to price. I like this structure because the yield source is not the same as eUSX. eUSX moves with perp funding. strcUSX moves with a Nasdaq-listed preferred coupon path. Different driver. Different risk profile. Both settle back to USX. I’m watching how deposits split between senior and junior here. Senior looks built for predictable yield. Junior is more for people willing to underwrite STRC price risk. That separation matters.

I'm proud to announce that my art is collected by the legend @FlyingBeagle_ for 750 XTZ on @objktcom 🙏 Thank you for your huge support! https://t.co/6uzrEkxLpx

Did you know solana:6FrrzDk5mQARGc1TDYoyVnSyRdds1t4PbtohCD6p3tgG lending is live on Loopscale? The stack is becoming more useful. @solsticefi produces yield through USX. Exponent splits that into: PT-USX ELP-USX Loopscale now accepts those assets as collateral. So USX can now be: held split LP’d used as collateral borrowed against Same base asset. More venues. More utility. Higher capital efficiency. I think this is the Solana DeFi edge. Not one app owning the full flow. Many apps making the same asset useful at each layer.

This update adds ~20% more liquidity to every newly migrated coin. No change to the bonding curve. No change to how LPs trade. Just more value staying in the pool after migration. Over many launches, that should push a lot of idle capital back into the ecosystem. Simple upgrade for users (finally)