The performance differences between the dog projects on the SOL chain and BSC chain ultimately boil down to the quality of developers and operational strategies.

There are very few high-quality developers on BSC, with a few well-known major players monopolizing the discourse. In this environment, it's hard for fresh blood to be injected. In contrast, the SOL chain has more foreign developers, many of whom have genuine innovative ideas. Even if there was some hype in the early stages of projects, as long as the concept is solid, they are easily recognized by major investors later on, and emotional dissemination naturally occurs, fostering community cohesion. This is the true meaning of "gold will always shine."

The composition of developers on BSC is markedly different—most are followers. When a popular concept appears, a bunch of clone projects follow suit immediately. The only way to sustain the market is through a few big V's shoutouts, which rely on hype rather than real project fundamentals. The final result is high fragmentation; after a cycle of hype, they still need to rely on short-term retail investor sentiment to maintain momentum. This model is destined to be unsustainable in the long run.

No wonder some top whales are reluctant to invest long-term in BSC. Even the most beautiful projects are just short-term happiness; ultimately, they must return to public chains that can provide genuine ecological support. This also explains why big V influencers on the SOL chain can add value with their endorsements, while some leading exchanges' investments in their own public chains seem to be fighting a lonely battle.

Instead of focusing all efforts on BUILD, it's better to find real ways to attract more high-quality developers and community strength. After all, the influence and resources of the top players in the crypto world are abundant, but without ecological support, even the most compelling promises are just hollow slogans.