Laomao: Co-founder of INBlockchain, managing partner of Xiong’an Fund, with years of investment management experience in the blockchain industry; CEO of Big.one and former Chief Operating Officer of yunmoney.com with over 200 industry-related articles published on his official WeChat account "Maoshuo".
Fred Wang: Founder of Mars Finance, Chairman of Linekong (HK. 8267), founding partner of Geek Founders and former Senior Vice President of Kingsoft.
The following is the sorted dialogue script.
Fred Wang: Let's take a look at his experience -- the legend of Laomao. When he was young, he worked at a public institution in Changzhou, Jiangsu Province and left for Shanghai when he was in his 30s. Later, he worked for his friend to sold thermal underwear on taobao.com, and ran a taobao shop for a medical examination brand.
In March 2013, He happened to learned on Weibo that the Bitcoin could be bought in China, so he immediately bought 20 Bitcoins at the cost of 6000 Yuan, which was the only money at his hands. Since then, he has been involved in the investment of Bitcoin.
He founded the first Bitcoin shopping platform of Poluojishi (pineapple bazaar) in 2014, and has since been interviewed by the Forbes magazine. In the same year, the Yunmoney.com was officially put online.
As an early value discoverer and exhorter of ETH, He promoted the Yunmoney.com to become the first domestic online exchange of Ethereum in 2016.
In 2017, he founded the ICOINFO and jointly established INBlockcoin with Xiaolai Li; he invested in more than 30 blockchain projects, with the overall return of more than 10 times.
In 2018, he became the managing partner of Xiong’an Fund, which has a total volume of 10 billion Yuan.
Laomao has also built a Maoshuo, the first "WeMedia" in the blockchain industry, and independently wrote nearly 200 articles relating to the industry. It is one of the most popular "WeMedia" with the highest attention and views in the industry, and has built one of the largest communities of Maoyouquan in the industry.
Fred Wang: Let's start with the denigration of Bitcoin by Warren Buffett. I've noticed you've criticized him that he didn’t understanding Bitcoin and even had no interest with Internet investing. At the shareholder meeting of Berkshire Hathaway this year, the 90-year-old Buffett said the cryptocurrencies would not have a good end as Bitcoin itself hadn't created anything. "All you're counting on is the next buyer picking up the offer at a higher price." Charlie Thomas Munger, Buffett's old partner, even said Bitcoin should be avoided like what we do to the plague. A few days later, Bill Gates told CNBC, "" as a category of asset, Bitcoin doesn't generate anything, so you shouldn't expect it to go up. It's a category of investment absolutely belonging to the greater fool theory and it will be in short selling when opportunities occur."
Buffett is known as the "stock sage" in the United States and a world-class investor; the lunch with Warren Buffett once auctioned at $2.6 million, and now there are still many people pilgrimage to the auction, a lot of smart people (such as Yongping Duan, the boss behind Oppo and Vivo, and Danyang Zhao, a master in the aspect of private placement, and Ye Zhu with game industry background) has auctioned and won the time to have the lunch with Buffet. Will Buffett's comments cause panic among coin traders? Why have Buffett, Munger and Gates, three elites at top class in the USA, all turned their noses up at Bitcoin? Are they really limited by their previous investment experience and fail to see the actual value of Bitcoin? Or because of something else? It is a question for a lot of people that which one they should trust, Buffett, or Satoshi Nakamoto? I'm sure you'll have some insight of your own.
Laomao: I actually interpret this question on my public account of Maoshuo last year, and I'd like to add some new thoughts here.
What Mr. Buffett's commented before is just a brief denigration of Bitcoin, according to my previous interpretation, it is limited by his age and understanding of high-tech industry; furthermore, it is because of his status of the shareholder of Wells Fargo and JPMorgan, which forced him to stand at the side of interests. That's all., It is not necessary to over-interpret it.
But Mr. Buffett's recent comments clearly marked by a sense of "pissed off," saying that Bitcoin was a rat poison and wouldn't end well, and so on, which comments were made by reaching conclusions directly without reasoning. And his partner Charlie Munger added that Bitcoin couldn't create anything. When I heard this, I just busted into laughter. As the boss of a pure financial investment company, he said that Bitcoin couldn't create anything. I just want to ask: their Berkshire stock, at $299,900 per share, a stock that has never paid dividends in history, what did this stock create?
If Bitcoin is regarded as the stock of the world's largest financial system in the future, there will be a lot more that Bitcoin can create than Berkshire stock. And the entire Blockchain industry ecosystem based on Bitcoin is completely unmatched by Berkshire.
Market capitalization of Berkshire's stock is $492 billion, and that of Bitcoin is $159.3 billion only, one third of the Berkshire shares. In my opinion, as the stock of the world's largest financial system in the future, the market capitalization of Bitcoin will exceed that of Berkshire's stock sooner or later. Once it happens, investors in Berkshire will collapse in confidence. The myth of Buffett will disappear, and this is why Buffett was flustered.
For Buffett, Bitcoin is a rat poison indeed. Whether Bitcoin has a good ending or not should be out of the sight by Buffett according to his age.
On the other hand, Buffett's ability to become a master investor is a product of a particular era, and I've always think that success is composed of 30% hard work and 70% luck.
I've studied Buffett before. He's actually done two important things. The first thing that made him as an investment master is the purchase of Berkshire in 1964 when he was 34 years old, and the second is the purchase of Coca-Cola in 1988. His other investments are negligible in the face of both. So don't deify Buffett, since there are certain opportunities in certain times. If he was in Japanese bubble economy at his investment age, he would be a classic case of investment failure, and no one would remember him.
As for the social elites of Buffett, Munger, Bill Gates and others who scoff at Bitcoin, it is boring to answer it. I have an analogy that will make you laugh.
In case a three-year-old child told you: I'm going to beat you, you'll be assured to snort him and think he's just a child! But 20 years later, you may even not deserve to be his rival. This will be bound to happen sooner or later. In addition, I don't think there's any panic. In the blockchain industry, people who understand it will naturally understand it, and those who do not understand it will not understand it all the time. They are already living in two different worlds in terms of investment concept.
So, in this world, Buffett is not a god, but a poor old man in a fit of rage. That what he sees as rat poison is the key to the future world that everyone in this industry looks forward to.
Fred Wang: Recently, another hot spot is the battle between the Binance and Sequoia. On May 7, a tweet made by Changpeng Zhao, the chief executive of Binance, sparked a flurry of comments, saying that in the future, applications submitted to the company would require disclosing whether Sequoia's direct or indirect investment was accepted or not, which is a riposte to Sequoia's complaint. The reason why sequoia and sequoia have such a bad relationship is that Sequoia did not successfully invest in the Binance. Sequoia investment in Binance is made by signing the agreement first, and then paying the investment fund. However, there is a 6-month exclusivity period. The digital currency prices soared all the way in the exclusivity period and the valuation price changesd greatly. IDG Capital replaced Binance later and made the evaluation of $400 million and $1 billion in two rounds, with the highest more 10 times than Sequoia’s evaluation at most.
To be honest, I do think that the six-month exclusivity period that a lot of big VCs still have is the overlord clause. Many VCs and angels have done a good job in this aspect subsequently. VCs really need to keep pace with the times. If you were Changpeng Zhao, what should you choose? Others say Changpeng is too smart to have friends.
Laomao: As for the battle between Sequoia and Binance, I wouldn’t to say who is right because it is very difficult for me to make the correct judgment only by the texts you’ve sent. Even I cannot determine whether there is a default as Sequoia said. I believe the court can make the right judgment t.
Actually, the stranger has no answer to this question. If I were Changpeng Zhao, I would certainly choose the direction of maximizing the interests of my own party because the maximization of my own interests is actually the maximization of the interests of shareholders and users. In this case, my own interests, shareholders' rights and interests as well as users' interests should be in consistence.
Fred Wang: I've experienced five or six venture capitals in US dollar and can apprehend some of sensations. We are not parties.
Laomao: The smartest people are always alone. So, if I had no friend for this reason, I would accept it.
Fred Wang: It is interesting that the Sequoia incident has not yet subsided, and the HADAX has strongly voiced against Binance. On May 8, Leon Li, CEO of Huobi.com, released a message in the circle of friends: Huobi Global was an enterprise invested by Sequoia Capital. There is no guarantee that all Sequoia investment projects would go online. However, for Projects invested by Sequoia and other global top VCs, bonus points will be gained when they are reviewed in the exchange. As clever Leon Li is, he was apparently to give voice for Sequoia’s face.
Coincidentally, just before the night at which Leon Li made his voice, I witnessed the scene of Mingxing Xu, the boss of OKCoin, drinking with Leon Li at the private dinner party of Xiaoping Xu and Bo Feng. After the photo was revealed, there was also speculation from all sides. Haha, I dare not say what was discussed in the actual dinner. In fact, it's not the first time that bosses of the two leading digital currency exchanges have had dinner together. If Changpeng Zhao had been in China, it is very probable that the three of them would have been drinking together. I think the relationship between the mainstream exchanges is like the people on the same boat who stand or fall together, what do you think about it?
Laomao: The relation between HADAX and OK is very good all the time, except for operators, a lot of things they do are always synchronous. They started around the same time and worked in the same building at early stage. They were not far from each other subsequently. Their bosses had good personal relationship and often drunk together in 2013 or so.
Subsequently, the two companies had used the mode of free Bitcoin transaction fee together, which directly led to the marginalization of Bitcoin China (BTCC). The two companies went online for leverage trading at the same time. In September 2014, the grand meetings were held in Beijing with two days apart. It was after these meetings that I joined the Pixiu team (the later Yunmoney coin) of Xiaolai Li. The last synchronization: on March 8, 2017, the two companies stopped the Bitcoin withdrawal at the same time. On September 16, 2017, they announced synchronously that they stopped the Bitcoin transaction. So, if you insist that this is purely a coincidence, then I can only think that your IQ moved me, haha.
In addition, there was a historical event of a serious dispute between Changpeng Zhao and Mingxing Xu over the domain name cooperation agreement of Bitcoin.com, which was the focus of discussion in the circle at that time. This event should completely put an end to their possible friendship. After this incident, I think there is a little possibility of Changpeng Zhao and Mingxing Xu to sit together at a same table.
In addition, I don't think the mainstream exchanges are on the same boat, but it's possible that HADAX and OK could be on a catamaran. In their opinion, other exchanges might not even qualify to be their friend.
Fred Wang: Let's talk about BM (Daniel Larimer) again, according to his personal experience over the years. He is probably the most successful blockchain entrepreneur in the world. BM is so great that he has successively founded three major blockchain projects of BitShares, Steemit and EOS in the past few years. Although many people criticize him as a person who begins well but ends badly, it can be seen from the current market feedback that he has attracted more and more attentions in his businesses one by one. Recently, BM announced the official release of EOS Dawn3.0 (Dawn4.0 has been already released recently), and he proposed 21 EOS super-node campaigns that had also attracted global attentions, prompting many people to follow it. Obviously, BM's commercial design ability is becoming more and more mature. From this perspective, what aforesaid is that the Code is law is outdated. We can find its existence in the future development of blockchain by combining technological capabilities, organizational mode innovation, new community, killer app use case and the ecosystem construction. My hunch is that there will be a group of people like BM in China who will enter the blockchain field and gain reputation from their products and dare to make investments.
The reason why I'm talking about BM is to remind the domestic investors in the blockchain industry not to be impatient. While others raise funds with products, we raise funds with white papers. A large number of people, who cannot write code or make products, will enter in industry following and catching up with the trend and take part in meetings everywhere after finishing the white paper.
Justin Sun, founder of Tron, said in his WeChat Moments yesterday that"In principle, Tron will not accept any funds rose with PPT white paper. Instead, it requires the minimum prototype of MVP." Laomao, in my opinion, thinks that the blockchain entrepreneurship has presented an increasingly similar situation to that of the Internet. Instead of raising funds with the white paper, entrepreneurs must raise funds with their products and can't make any gestures. What do you think about it? What are the INBlockcoin's investment options for this year?
Laomao: It's supposed to be so, isn't it? It is allowed to raise funds with the white paper in the market in the past, which is determined by market factors. To speak bluntly, the investing party and the invested party are the business relationship at their wills. Everything can be targeted when there are too many capitals and less investment subjects. But there are too many investment subjects, and there are fewer subjects that deserve our investments.
On this New Year's day, I announced that I would accept no investment individually any longer., On one hand, I have no desire to make money; on the other, it is hard to find the project worthy investment in the market. After all, I have seen too many projects in the industry, and there are many persons who think they will be a unicorn in the future. However, in fact, it is OK for most projects that can survive like alpaca. I would like to spend years to wait for a tyrannosaurus project.
However, what the investment institutions think is certainly different from mine. They originally have the mission of investment, which is also their business model. Therefore, it is reasonable to choose some reliable and promising projects to continue to invest continuously. But with more and more projects and choices, they are inevitably becoming more selective.
For entrepreneurs, it is wise not to disgrace without a real product. The entrepreneurs in the blockchain industry shall start a business with a lifetime of credit because everything is loaded with credit. If you bet on failure, there may be no chance to rise again. So, I do things very carefully at present, and I endorse everything I do with my credit.
The investment basis of INBlockcoin is still Xiaolai Li's open source blockchain investment principle, which will not be changed easily.
Fred Wang: Now, it is about one month before the main EOS network goes online in June, and the atmosphere of super node campaign preparation is getting more and more intensive. Up to now, there are 74 candidates (including 20 in China) in the contest. Some people called it "a US election in the coin circle", while others claimed directly it was "a political game". As for the EOS super-node activity itself, could you please give us more knowledge here? Also, what I'm a little curious is why you want to participate in the campaign in an independent way instead of working with your good partner Xiaolai Li? After all, you may work together in the name of INBlockchain.
Laomao: The term of super node first appeared probably from the text of "At the precarious moment, I choose to be a super node" in my official account on March 9, 2018. I searched on Google, and there was no super node before this date.
In addition, I also created a term of "blockchain asset" before. Now if you search this term on Google, the top page is the Yunmoney.com of which I used to being COO. Also, I created the blockchain industry index, and there were real-time indexes and instructions on the pages of blockchain.com. On January 1, 2017, it was 1000 points, and now it's 12464.23. I would be proud if my little creations would bring even a little convenience to the industry.
The debate over the super node of EOS is actually exaggerated by China's blockchain media and Internet. It is also a small event in technology circle abroad, which explains why China accounts for nearly one-third of the total campaign team. But I'm happy to see the intensive competition.
As a global blockchain infrastructure platform, it is very important to have enough high-quality nodes to guarantee its performance. In fact, I don't think the campaign is intensive enough to encourage more strong teams to take part in. The original plan of EOS was 21 BP (super nodes) and 100 ordinary nodes. Now there are only 74 ordinary nodes in the global campaign. According to this situation, it is possible to change the ordinary node to 50. If it is the case, it is a good opportunity for ordinary nodes even if you don't be elected as the super node. Ordinary nodes also have benefits, which are based on the number of votes. So, if you have the ability to take part in the campaign, welcome to the campaign.
As for political games and so on, I think it's an over-interpretation. The people who are filled with politics and games can politicize and gamify this serious matter. But I see more technology and humanities, because I don't understand politics or play games.
I will stick to non-alignment principle throughout the EOS super node campaign because I always think each super node should have independence. If more than half of the super nodes are alliance between them, which will have a decisive vote on project development in the future, it is unfavorable to the development of the project. I will stick to my independence and not take part in any of the alliance.
I would like to give a piece of advice to our domestic campaign colleagues. In fact, few teams from China attended the global node developer network conference except for us. I call on domestic nodes not to just remember to attend parties, and it is important to make the real technological communication. As for vote-buying, the EOS officials were saying it's against the constitution. What’s more, there are 30 votes per coin. I think that means very little because the cost of vote buying is too high. That might be the logic of basic economics.
To give some help to the candidates of the domestic super node, I will share with you the important information related to the deployment of the super node we collected on my EosLaoMao website in these two days. I do not want to participate in the alliance, but I will not be stingy in sharing our technical information with other nodes. As for the possibility, I never care about it too much. What I do is for my original intention rather than my individual future. Perhaps this is also the so-called Buddha department.
Finally, I’d like to tell you why I'm running in the campaign independently. I ran in an independent capacity, because I didn't think it was necessary to use INB resources. However, it was amplified by the media, and it seemed a bit unusual for me to run as an independent candidate. However, I would not change anything about it.
Fred Wang: Someone joked that the biggest application of blockchain is for meeting. There are many meeting invitations every day. I might be invited to attend the meeting in Macao today, Singapore next week, Dubai and Phuket in following days, followed by those in Cambodia and Malta and so on. I am very grateful for your invitation. But I say no to most of them because I fed up with those meetings so much. Recently, at the blockchain summit in Macao, some people sent photos of mid-aged aunts that hung on the wall. I told the initiator Hong Yu that it was probably the best blockchain promotion. Across the industry, I'm a little puzzled: do we need to bring a crowd of Chinese to attend meetings around the world in such a high frequency?
Laomao: First, I want to answer this question seriously. I have actually answered it with my behaviors. I hardly attend any meetings organized by any party. I am serious in this matter. I'm used to reject a lot of industrial meetings directly. It is not because my arrogance, but because I have seen too many boring meetings and I'm afraid I would be criticized while doing nothing.
I think the global conferences are the manifestation of the bubble. In the past, the industry was on the rise. Many companies and individuals made money so easily that they didn't care about the cost of those meetings. Therefore, people would attend every meeting as possible as they can. Some of the organizers, who charge high ticket prices as a way to make money, also take advantage of this, and launch a summit by inviting a few VIP guests. The meeting process is not important. The important thing is to get together and to know each other in order to find a sense of existence. Some attendees think they'll also be the VIP guests if they attended sufficient meetings.
In 2018, I've heard of more than a dozen summits. Who can tell me if any significant results have been produced at those meetings? Is there any meeting that is significant to the development trend of the industry? As a small company, we will pursue the result of the meeting when we hold a meeting. However, coin circle summits only pursue the sense of excitement and the existence of attending the meeting. In fact, this need is the same as the old lady's square dance. So it was no surprise to see the elderly women in various venues. Meeting = square dancing.
Fred Wang: However, I think that it is not really a victory conference without the attending of old ladies and it is difficult to be reported by CCTV in the news broadcast program. So, it is very successful that the 3.0 wechat group held the summit in Macao.
Laomao: I have experience of organizing meetings, too. In July 2017, I held a meeting of 400 people in Shanghai, which may be the only one in the industry without the attendance of elderly woman. As the beginning of EOS in China, the meeting was at very low-profile without any propaganda. Iit even didn’t not selling tickets publicly. The whole conference participants are mainly my group members, but the guests are is very famous. CEOs of most top trading varieties in terms of the market capitalization presented and delivered speeches, which included three important members of the EOS. At that time, a peer said: Laomao, it is so difficult for others to hold a meeting after this meeting.
So I'm not averse to the meeting itself, but I'm not going to attend any meeting where you can't see any result. I agree that people need attend meetings and old ladies also need square dance.
Fred Wang: Many friends who have just entered in the blockchain will usually ask me a question: why doesn’t the white paper show who is the real initiator and entrepreneur? I know there are some objective reasons. But from an investor's point of view, he will lose his sense of coordinates in heart. He can't see or measure the founding team and the core characters in particular, nor can he percept and evaluate them. From this point of view, I think Justin Sun did a good job. Although there are countless pits ahead, he rushed at the frontline. So you can see his spirit and can evaluate how devoted he is to this matter. I said that many blockchain entrepreneurs in China only learned to write white papers. I guess 90% of the white papers were not written by themselves Not only have they no product prototype, but also entrepreneurs have no courage to offer their stage supports in many projects. What do you think of this "invisible person"?
Laomao: The invisible person is a specific phenomenon in a specific period, which is also the miracle under a specific regulatory state. Anyway, no one wants to be guilty of "illegal fundraising" under high pressure.
However, this is obviously detrimental to the development of the project as it is possible that the foundation of trust does not exists any longer, which will lead to the poor performance of the project Token in the market and affect the construction of the project community. I would not like to make any comment on Justin Sun, whose "success" does not have any value of imitation. If his project is released now, it is also uncertain whether it will be anonymous or not. It is unreasonable to make comparisons in different periods.
There are two kinds of invisible projects. One is actually a good project and a mature large company behind it. Considering the security of the company's business, it has no choice but not to release the subject of overseas business until the completion of construction. But such projects are usually released on more reliable platforms. After all, the blockchain is the wind gap where many companies are secretly competing, but there are policy obstacles in the implementation. The other is bad projects that disguised as good projects for fraud. It is natural that such projects disappear and the founders run away. What I can only advise is that ordinary investment users should avoid the invisible projects without any endorsement as far as possible, or choose a reliable platform at least.
Fred Wang: There is an interesting phenomenon: people who have made great achievements in the blockchain world seem to have prominent positions in the Internet era according to my observation. For example, Laomao, who once sold thermal underwear on taobao.com and operated a taobao shop for a health examination brand, which is expressed in mainstream language as "starting from the grassroots." Is the name of Laomao from the name of the shop? How does Laomao become the celebrity in the coin circle from an employee of a taobao shop after three or two times of job-hopping? What are the key turning points in this process?
Laomao: I think the correct way to ask this question should be: why did prominent figures in the Internet era fail in the blockchain world?
Fred Wang: This is the converse-negative proposition.
Laomao: Actually, any success opportunity has a sense of times. For example, Steve Jobs and Bill Gates have such success opportunities in their era. In the Internet era, Netease, Sohu and Sina also occupied their positions; while in the age of wireless Internet, BAT was the winner.
It is more difficult for those who have succeeded once to succeed than those who have not. When all new opportunities look like toys at the beginning, and if the blockchain industry isn't big enough that previous big players won't get involved in, there will be more opportunities for those who got involved at the first phase.
My biggest chance was that I joined the industry in the winter of 2014 and met Xiaolai Li. At that time, Alibaba had just gone public, and I felt it was time to leave the e-commerce industry. Anyway, the wind gap bonus is over, and Alibaba is going to harvest it. Since then, I have rarely heard the successful people from the e-commerce.
Fred Wang: People involved in the e-business and the game have the unique insights in operation and strong ability to interpret data.
Laomao: Before I met Xiaolai Li, I was just a beginner writer who "could make a thing clear". But he inexplicably set up a community of Alipay called "Bitcoin survival guide" and asked me to operate it. He later transferred the group manager to me, so that I start earning in addition to my salary.
The group is actually a hot potato because I didn't have any experience to run a community. I was so nervous before Xiaolai Li that I was so afraid that I would be humiliated by screwing it up. Under the pressure of the growth of the community, I kept learning and continuously inputting, and then shared output. Later, in order to systematize the output, I started to set up the official account. Under the pressure of high quality output of public account content, I began to study this industry. During this process, my cognition has been constantly upgraded, and many members of my community have achieved wealth leapfrog due to my cognitive ability. The word of mouth and communication of these members have created my reputation.
If I have a little bit of popularity, I can say that I was driven by Xiaolai Li and forced by the industry. It proves what I aforesaid that all success is composed of 70% luck, and of course the other 30% comes from my own efforts. In order to upgrade my cognition, I studied the industry and wrote articles. I could not count how many times I slept after 3 o 'clock in deep night. The god must be blind if my level of awareness in the industry is not successful!
Success in this industry is the result of luck and hard work. However, this industry develops so fast that my small success has been magnified. Therefore, I don't think I am a boss. It’s just compliment of others.
Weixing Chen: He who gains trust will gain the real consensus. Transparency, openness, impartiality, and sharing are essences of genuine consensus.
Laomao: I agree with it very much; trust is the most important ticket to the industrial ship.
Group friend: According to the iceberg theory, will the blockchain look like just the top corner? Has BAT layout not floated on surface, or did we deliberately turn a blind eye to it?
Laomao: Anything is possible. I think it is probably a trial right now. Nonetheless, the nature of blockchain is deconstructive the centralization, so it's kind of a dilemma for them to make trials.
Fred Wang: At the launch event of the Xiong’an Fund of RMB ten billion in Hangzhou recently, you delivered a speech. I think it was very good. As one of the most important partners of INBlockchain, you seem to be keeping a low profile. Though you've written good articles with a unique point of view, Eric, your partner in Silicon Valley, has more opportunities than you to appear in the public. He is an American who speaks Chinese better than locals, and is fast becoming a web celebrity. I also read your article saying that you are not responsible for investing in INBlockchain, what exactly is your role in it? From this point of view, I think your relationship with Xiaolai Li is a bit like the relationship between Xiaoping Xu and Qiang Wang in Zhen Fund, who have been partners for many years and trust each other. But one of them is an extremely active helmsman and social activist, and the other is a reclusive entrepreneur instructor and massage therapist?
Laomao: My speech is only delivered just to those who can understand it. I think the same words may have different effects when said to different people. So, I rarely speak publicly now. Those who can understand my words are almost readers of my articles on the official account as well as those grow up with the community. I feel very satisfied to have them.
In addition, Eric should certainly have more opportunity to take activities in public. He is a treasure of ours, and I appreciate him very much. I also think it's time for young people to seize opportunities to appear in public because they have advantages both in terms of ability and energy. This industry is destined to be a young people's world in the future.
There is a division of labor within INB: Xiaolai Li is responsible for the investment fund business and I am responsible for overseas and new businesses. There is a very high trust relationship between us. Although I am a partner of Xiaolai Li, he has always been a beacon in my mind. So it is my greatest honor to be his partner, which is also my most proud identity. If I didn't meet Xiaolai Li, I might be a person who made a little money from coin exchange at most.
I don't care about the so-called positioning. Let nature take its course. I want to do what I like to do and what I think will be excellent in the future. That's probably the way to the freedom I think about.
Fred Wang: I try to ask the gossip. It is said that you and Xiaolai Li have a WeChat group, of which, the entry threshold is 500ETH. I noticed that Xiaolai Li had a quote in his 2017 summary: "At the end of 2015, I created a paid community of Bitcoin survival guide, and there were about two hundred people in the group when I gave it to my classmates Laomao, who took it over. In less than two years, there have been many billionaires and multimillionaires in the group.” Is that true? The market has been very cold in the past few months, and the digital currency has plunged. But it began to recover recently. What about your friends in your group?
Laomao: What you mentioned is the ETH group. It should be the group fee of 600 ETHs collected by the investment department to screen qualified investors. Now, this group has only a few members, and most of them have exited and their ETH is returned. In the future, it is impossible for others to join the group. These remaining members are qualified investors who have been screened out and are truly worthy to invest in quality projects with INB.
As for the group of Bitcoin survival guide, it was free at the beginning and charged at RMB 88 for one person later. When I took it over, there were about 200 people. At that time, they were probably charged at RMB 198 for one person. Later, more and more people joined it. Under the pressure, the fee became higher and higher and reached RMB 8,888 per person in the end. Most of these persons are still in my group of 500 people. Strangers cannot join it because there are many people to occupy every vacant, if any.
This group is not an information group, and mostly involves methodology. If I lead people to the coin speculation with information, do you think I deserve my reputation? I deliberately left a record of sharing to prove myself. What we spread is the knowledge and recognition rather than speculation information and sorcerer' s dance.
I sorted out the articles on my official account "Laomao Chaguan" a few days ago. I shared my articles every week for half a year from early June 2016 to Christmas in 2016. A community needs fresh blood. I want to continue my community path with new community management tools.
Fred Wang: You put forward your vision for 2018 in your Annual Review 2017 at the end of last year. The first item is to choose a new lifestyle: moving to Japan. Today, you have opened a new chapter in your career and life in Japan. Dong Zhao is also in Japan. Does he often get together with you? Do Chinese people working on blockchain in Japan often contact and meet with each other? What do locals in Japan think of blockchain entrepreneurs from China? When do you plan to come back from Japan?
Laomao: Yes, Dong Zhao is also in Japan and he is one of my good friends. We will get together if we are available. He came to my house for drink at deep night last month. Both of us were so busy that we had to wait for the other’s schedule if we want to drink. Yong Liu has already been my neighbor.
Actually when coming to Japan, you will be very busy as long as you start to do things. We really do not have time to contact with each other. In addition to regular meetings with Dong Zhao, the only time I gather with them is to take part in the Runaway Prince Gong's hackathon as a guest.
I get a lot of domestic friends coming to visit me regularly. I basically meet three or four people a week who come to me from China. My living room is the only way for friends in the circle to come to Tokyo. It is said that because one can see Tokyo bay in my house, it has been rated as "5A scenic spot". I am wondering whether I will have a charging mode in the future.
Fred Wang: Plus 1, what was your original goal in life? Is the life what you want today? For years, what have you been keeping sticking to, and what is the thing you finally betray? Plus 2, how many Bitcoins do you have?
Laomao: My life goal is "freedom". I think I have achieved it stage by stage. I like my life now. What I've been sticking to is kindness and cleanliness, which I think I've achieved. I'm lucky to have achieved a certain level of success in this way. What have I betrayed? I can't remember it. In my world, there is only alienation but no betrayal.
I don’t have a lot of Bitcoins. They are might be in three-digital number. If you ask me about EOS, I'll be a little proud, but I don't want to tell you now. I don't dare say about ETH.
Group friend: I have a curious question for eldest brothers drifting overseas: as you are not young anymore, what makes you decide to take a trip freely at the cost of completely abandoning the life in Mainland China and start a middle-aged man's dream for poem and distant place? When you were young, you may go wherever and whenever you want to do so. Once you are in your middle age, you have to support your family. What makes you take this trip, for the blockchain in your heart, or the happiness brought by the freedom of wealth?
Laomao: It is unimaginable how unrestrained and romantic a person's heart is when he is confined to a small space. Happiness and all the problems that can be solved with money are not a real problem.