Introduction of the panelists:
David Namdar (@namdar): CEO of BNC and co-founder of Galaxy Digital, he has over a decade of experience in cryptocurrency and capital markets. He currently serves as CEO of BNB Network Company (BNC), a Nasdaq-listed company, leading a digital asset treasury project centered around BNB, known as the "MicroStrategy of BNB."
CZ: Founder and former CEO of Binance, and one of the most influential entrepreneurs in the global cryptocurrency industry.
David: Okay, good morning, CZ. Nice to meet you.
CZ: Good morning, David. Nice to meet you.
David: I'm really excited to start this conversation with you. We've known each other for a long time, and it's been an exciting journey. The market has been fantastic lately, especially with BNB hitting a new all-time high today. How's things going on there? Where are you connecting from?
CZ: Things are going pretty well. I'm in Tokyo right now. Like you said, BNB is hitting all-time highs. I'm not sure what's causing it, but I think your hard work has definitely contributed, so thank you. Overall, everything is going well.
David: I'm glad to hear that. I'd like to revisit this from the beginning. Our journey together in the crypto space has been amazing. Back in 2017, when BNB launched, the ICO and utility token craze was at its peak. BNB really stood out during that wave, being the first project to break the mold and quite innovative at the time. How do you view its evolution over the years? Did you ever imagine it would grow into the vibrant ecosystem it is today?
CZ: That's a great question. Initially (in 2017), BNB was just an ERC-20 token on Ethereum, used for fundraising. We knew we were going to develop a blockchain, one that would be public, decentralized, and so on. But I didn't actually anticipate it would grow into a full ecosystem. So it's really rewarding to see it all unfold now. Honestly, for the past seven or eight years, I've been busy running centralized exchanges for the majority of my time, and I haven't really spent much time on the BNB chain. For the past two years or so, I've also been dealing with the US government, handling cases, flying there, spending four months in jail, and so on. So, we haven't really put a lot of time and effort into the BNB chain in those seven or eight years. Despite that, the community has grown. This year, in particular, we've started paying more attention to the BNB chain. I'm also paying more attention to the BNB chain now—I don't have much else to do.
CZ: And you're also part of this ecosystem, which is really impressive. We've seen the BNB chain really flourish this year. That's great. I think even today, the BNB chain is still underdeveloped, and the entire ecosystem is still underdeveloped. This means there's still a lot of opportunity for different projects to grow. Overall, I think it's great.
David: Yes, I totally agree. I've been really promoting BNB a lot lately, and I've been doing my best to explain to investors the difference between BNB (the asset) and the BNB Chain (the entire ecosystem), and how it has evolved to the point where it's no longer tied to any single company. How do you typically explain this difference to people?
CZ: Yes, it confuses many people. Many media outlets like to refer to BNB as "Binance Coin." This has to do with history: it was indeed called that in the beginning. We've since attempted to rebrand several times to differentiate the two. BNB initially had more of a stake in the Binance centralized exchange, but now, as you mentioned, it's its own thriving ecosystem. BNB is a native asset on multiple blockchains, including BNB Smart Chain, Greenfield, opBNB, and previously the Tendermint-based BNB Beacon Chain. In the future, BNB will also be the native token of multiple blockchains using newer technologies. BNB is the token that powers the decentralized ecosystem of the BNB blockchain and is very different from the "Binance token." While Binance's centralized exchange still offers fee discounts for using BNB, that's just one of many use cases. Centralized exchanges also offer BNB holders opportunities to participate in yield-generating airdrops, such as through Launchpad, Launchpool, and Binance Alpha. But again, this is also part of BNB's equity. BNB itself is a vibrant and expansive ecosystem: multiple DEXs, perpetual contract DEXs, lending protocols, stablecoins, and more. The BNB blockchain encompasses a vast array of things. I also find it difficult to explain clearly to many people, and people tend to get confused. I think you've done a better job than I have. Thank you for your help.
David: No, not yet, but thank you for the compliment. Listen, one thing I really do out there right now is to provide as much explanation as possible. You know, we've talked about this a lot: I've been in this space for a long time and have witnessed a lot of evolution. I've seen a lot of people come and go, and I've seen iteration and innovation, especially driven by regulatory factors. Right? So for me, it's great to be able to explain how this evolution has happened, including what you've built over the years, and you're one of the best builders in the industry. In my opinion, BNB is a combination of many things, and it has demonstrated that it may be the chain that has most consistently iterated and upgraded over the years. Every chain, like Ethereum, has its own roadmap, many different ideas, and visions for upgrades. We also know that Bitcoin has a lot of "political factors" when it comes to BIPs (Block Improvement Proposals), and there's a lot of iteration. So, in a sense, BNB can be considered one of the chains that has most successfully upgraded and evolved over the years.
CZ: Yes. I think every chain is constantly evolving. The BNB chain has evolved more, as it evolved from a Tendermint-based blockchain. It started as an ERC-20 token, then migrated to a Tendermint blockchain, became an EVM-compatible chain, and then grew into a second layer (opBNB). Then there's Greenfield (partial storage). There are also new variants being considered and developed by developers. From this perspective, we've evolved more structurally. Most other blockchains start with a single architecture and maintain it; from the perspective of the BNB chain, the BNB token is the native asset of multiple blockchains. The underlying technology can evolve over time. I've had several discussions with some core developers. They're looking at what the "next generation" will be: a next-generation architecture that delivers 100x or 1,000x the throughput, greater capacity and stability, lower fees, and is fully AI-aware and AI-ready. It also needs to natively support stablecoins, RWAs, and more. There's been a lot of discussion about this. I hope our mindset, and the community's mindset towards BNB, is that this coin will be native to multiple blockchains, and that the technology will continue to evolve rapidly. I hope we can achieve this together.
David: Yes, absolutely. And a big part of it is about the community, as you said. Over the years, the community has been inspired by you, the BNB Chain team, and everyone involved. I've been observing this myself and see a lot of enthusiasm. You mentioned stablecoins a few times, so let's delve a little deeper. The "stablecoin story" is happening right now: with the recent Circle IPO and Ethereum's performance over the past few months, Wall Street and many investors are beginning to recognize the potential of stablecoins, and the approval of Genius has also had an impact. I would say that in many ways, we've seen very strong growth in stablecoins on the BNB chain, even surpassing Ethereum at some stages. So, what are your thoughts on the stablecoin landscape on the chain? From a global perspective, would you consider stablecoins a kind of "USD ETF"?
CZ: There's so much to talk about stablecoins. People now realize that stablecoins may be one of the biggest businesses in crypto. Binance, as a centralized exchange, has a strong influence on which projects are listed, but if we look at profitability, I think Tether may be the most profitable company per capita in human history. For example, they make $13-15 billion a year with about 200 employees—that's outrageous. So everyone wants to invest in stablecoins now. Circle has also had some success. In fact, BUSD was halted by the NYDFS about two years ago, but it grew from zero to $23 billion in two to three years, and that was during a relatively anti-crypto administration (the Biden administration's "war on crypto"). But USDC wasn't halted, so it continued to grow and is now publicly listed. There are thousands of projects trying to develop stablecoins, which is great. I think it will bring more diversity, some offering higher returns, some with new features, etc. But if you really look at the stablecoin landscape, my impression is that there's actually not much demand for stablecoins in the United States. Although the largest stablecoins in crypto today are denominated and pegged to the US dollar, domestic transfers are relatively easy in the US thanks to ACH. Stablecoins are widely used internationally, outside the US. Stablecoins help make the US dollar more dominant globally. Honestly, every country wants its currency to be more widely used globally. For example, the Chinese renminbi aspires to become the dominant global currency, and so do other countries. Stablecoins are one way to achieve this. They help the crypto and blockchain industries better integrate into the traditional financial system, providing crypto practitioners with a stable value anchor within the ecosystem, at least denominated in fiat. They are also beneficial to individual countries. So, from a purely economic perspective, countries should encourage the development of their own stablecoins. Let's return to the BNB chain ecosystem. Historically, neither USDT nor USDC has strong native support; they only recently began native issuance. I believe Tether is still not natively issued on the BNB chain, while Circle has, but only recently. So there's a gap, a niche to fill. I think USD1 fills this niche well, and we've seen very strong growth over the past few months. So I think stablecoins are here to stay and will become a major player—more accurately, a very large market. A few years ago, I didn't quite understand it myself. When we first started Binance, I wondered: Who would use a stablecoin? Why not just use fiat currency? But stablecoins do solve a lot of problems: international transfers are much easier using blockchain; blockchains have no borders, which helps keep prices synchronized across exchanges; and they're also a more accessible form of fiat. Because of this, they've grown so rapidly and will continue to do so. There's still a lot of opportunity in the stablecoin space on the BNB chain, as it's underdeveloped. We've seen significant growth in USD1, and I actually expect more development there.
David: Yes, I agree. This brings us back to the NYDFS. They're definitely creating problems. Even since I first started in this space, New York's Bit License has been slowing innovation not only in New York, but also across the US and globally. Many regulators would look at New York's Bit License and use it as an excuse to slow down crypto development. So, the "war on crypto" started much earlier. Now, when it comes to many stablecoins, I'd also go back to the original Tether. Tether was born out of industry need: people wanted to move value between exchanges, and the existing financial infrastructure tried to stop it. Tether fulfilled its role and grew into what you described—one of the most profitable companies in the industry and globally. As BNB on-chain activity increases, demand for stablecoins will naturally be captured and help support this activity.
David: Moving on to the next area, RWAs. I think we're finally reaching an inflection point in RWA growth. Over the past few cycles, we've seen a lot of starts and stops: from the earliest real estate tokenization projects to some fund tokenization. But now we're definitely seeing a lot of RWA activity picking up. How do you see where we are in the RWA adoption curve right now, and what are you observing around the BNB chain?
CZ: We've been in this space for over a decade and are die-hard believers. We believe everything will be tokenized. This includes not just buildings and traditional money market funds, but even people and virtual objects. So, everything can be tokenized, but tokenization isn't easy. I personally believe that more traditional financial instruments will be tokenized first because they're more suitable for trading. For example, real estate has relatively low price volatility and low trading volume, resulting in poor liquidity. If you tokenize a building, the price is relatively stable, so trading volume won't be high. Without sufficient trading volume, people won't place large orders on the order book, making liquidity even worse. If you want to trade millions of dollars or more, it's difficult and prone to erratic price behavior. Not every asset is easy to tokenize. Crypto assets, due to their high price volatility, have a "characteristic" that makes them more tradeable and leads to higher trading volumes. Furthermore, if you tokenize a building, if you want to buy the entire building, you have to buy all the tokens available on the market. The few remaining token holders might be reluctant to sell, driving up the price. Furthermore, owning a "fragment" of a building doesn't necessarily mean you can live in it. In other words, what kind of economic rights and benefits are conferred? There are also regulatory concerns: when you tokenize a building, is it considered a security? Or something else? Who will regulate it? This issue is particularly acute in large countries, where financial markets may have multiple regulators. This may not be the case in other countries, but the regulatory framework remains crucial. What can and cannot these tokens do? Many questions remain unclear today. I believe RWAs will be very large and will continue to grow. If you count stablecoins as RWAs (as many do), they are already very large. Other newer assets will also be interesting. However, I personally believe that traditional financial assets will be tokenized first, followed by commodities (such as oil and corn) that are easier to conceptualize and redeem, and finally other assets.
David: That makes sense. This is also what excites me about the current cycle: many crypto players are entering the traditional financial sector like never before. At the same time, we're also seeing some TradFi (traditional finance) players experimenting with the crypto market. For example, I think Galaxy is one of the first companies, perhaps even the first, to tokenize its equity recently. You've probably seen news about this. We'll see more of these attempts. Whether there's truly significant demand, and whether people in the crypto community are genuinely interested in participating in the traditional financial market for tokenized shares, remains to be seen. Now, back to the topic of the migration of value from centralized to decentralized exchanges and other areas of the future. At the recent BNB Day, you said: If you could start over again and be 20 years younger, you'd work on an AI agent and a privacy-focused DEX. This resonated deeply with me. When you think about that tipping point—and I've heard you talk a lot about "future scenarios"—about how the crypto market will move from centralized exchanges to DEXs, how do you think this will evolve?
CZ: Absolutely. Let me first address your other point: tokenizing stocks. I think this is the most obvious thing to do, because which country doesn't want its stocks to be accessible to global users? The problem is that most stocks are classified as "securities." Countries have very strict laws regarding securities (most have regulators like the SEC), and there's also some kind of international SEC alliance. So, some people issuing stock tokens are trying to jump through a lot of hoops to separate "tokens" from "securities." This creates problems: the token price and the stock price don't sync, which isn't right. In my opinion, if there's a price difference, you should buy the cheaper one and redeem it for the more expensive one; as more people do this, the price difference will disappear. But the fact that the price difference persists indicates that the entire process isn't streamlined. By my definition, this means the product "isn't working yet." But I do believe that stock tokenization is a large market, and we need clear regulatory guidance on what's allowed and what's not. I know many countries are piloting this, including the US, the UAE, and others.
CZ: Back to AI. I believe AI will increase the volume of human interaction by three to six orders of magnitude, say, a thousand to a million times. In the future, each of us will have thousands of agents working behind the scenes for us. There will be agents transcribing this content—perhaps AI is already transcribing this podcast. Hopefully, there will be agents editing the video, picking out the highlights, smoothing out the wrinkles, and then posting it online and monetizing it in some way. For example, people will watch a third of the video, and to see the remaining two-thirds, they'll have to pay a small fee, perhaps even just a fraction of a few cents. All of these transactions will be "ultra-high frequency and ultra-low cost." I believe blockchain is the only solution capable of handling this type of transaction. AI will significantly increase the volume of blockchain transactions. Blockchain can also do a lot for AI: for example, "secure AI," such as privacy protection, secure training, and secure data collection and use, can all be achieved using blockchain in a way that truly puts users in control. I've also talked to some AI companies: they're using blockchain to bring transparency to the algorithm development process, allowing people to peer inside, because currently it's a black box. We don't know what data was used for training, but AI seems to be able to come up with answers. For example, if I ask AI to summarize any book—if it has the book, I'm not sure it paid for each one; I'm not sure it paid $10 for each existing book. If I ask it to summarize a paid webpage, AI will inexplicably come up with it. Therefore, there are many potential problems in AI that can be solved by blockchain. Again, I believe this is a huge industry. A better way to put it is: at least in my lifetime, there have been three foundational technologies: the internet, blockchain, and AI. The internet still has many opportunities, but the latter two are just getting started. All three have significant room for growth, and the latter two have particularly huge potential.
David: I completely agree. I've also spent a lot of time researching the AI market and its evolution. Last year, I was considering many ideas, such as building a bank dedicated to AI agents. Each of us would have thousands of agents, conducting trillions of transactions daily—a scale beyond our brains' ability to comprehend. We need a scalable, blockchain-based ecosystem to support these activities. You also mentioned that AI can't perform know-your-customer (KYC) and open accounts at exchanges and banks. So, without blockchain, this wouldn't be possible. Back in 2017-2018, I was involved in one of the earliest AI agent projects, called "Botchain," which never took off. When you have unlimited, unimaginable amounts of robot-to-bot communication, we need to leave traces, and these records must be verifiable and on-chain. This way, during audits, we can see: where my LLM/agent pulls data, where yours pulls data, and what agreements they reach over time.
David: Now I want to backtrack a bit from the topic of CEXs vs. DEXs, as this is another fascinating question in the market. Looking back over the past few cycles, centralized exchanges have long been the key drivers of a lot of activity and the "first stop" for many people in crypto. We're seeing rapid growth in DEXs, a trend we both expect to continue. How do you envision this evolving over time?
CZ: The trend is very clear. In the long term, DEXs will be larger than CEXs. This is absolutely clear. As you said, I see CEXs as a stepping stone for people entering the crypto world. Users coming from Web2 find it easier to get started with an email and password, with customer service and people who can help them step by step. The concept of a custodial platform is also easier to understand, as it's conceptually more like a bank. But as they gain more experience, they'll say, "I now have my own wallet, which I can manage myself. This gives me greater freedom and control, but also comes with more responsibilities (like protecting my equipment). Once people understand this, they'll turn to DEXs. Therefore, I absolutely believe that DEXs will be larger than CEXs in the future. Therefore, the chain itself—the chain's ecosystem—is extremely important. This is why, in the long run, I believe the "chain ecosystem" is far more important than any centralized exchange. In this sense, my forced time away from centralized exchanges is actually a good thing. Now I can spend more time contributing to the decentralized ecosystem. And it's actually quite fascinating, because once you get used to it... I would say that right now, the decentralized ecosystem is still a bit difficult for the average person to use. Trading volume is growing and is quite impressive, but for the average user, using a decentralized product means seeing a lot of random strings of characters, a lot of random numbers on the screen—what to do? Even on centralized exchanges, there are a lot of numbers, but at least they're understandable. We need to make our products better and more user-friendly as a community. But "on-chain, decentralized" is definitely the future; otherwise, we wouldn't be in this industry, right?
David: This also ties into what excites me about the market today. Looking back on my career: I came from the world of traditional finance, but now I'm a "crypto geek" and a "lifelong crypto person," and I'll always be. I've been trying to connect the crypto and capital markets: working on a Bitcoin ETF, taking Galaxy public, and helping other companies go public. In every cycle, I try to help as many people see opportunities as possible, serving as a small bridge between the two markets. As for where we are today: we're seeing a lot of activity flowing from centralized exchanges to decentralized exchanges, but at the same time, the vast majority of the world's wealth and capital still flows within traditional finance, through centralized exchanges and markets within the traditional world.
David: I think the truly huge opportunity right now is "Digital Asset Treasuries." This is what Michael Saylor has accomplished over the past five years. In fact, I was just talking to someone: Michael Saylor wasn't always a Bitcoin believer. In contrast, you and I have been championing Bitcoin since we entered this space, while also striving to champion BNB, and we remain long-term believers. I often tell people, "You're probably the only person I've met in the industry who can get everyone to step back and stay focused during every volatility." "Focus on holding the bid, don't get shaken out by the volatility." Volatility is a "characteristic," especially in a rapidly growing asset class. With the improving regulatory environment and growing investor awareness of the potential and value of digital assets, I think Saylor has been ahead of the curve and leading the charge. Simon from Metaplanet Japan, David Bailey, and now Anthony Pompliano—many others are championing Bitcoin, helping people understand how this asset class can become a unique asset on government and corporate balance sheets.
David: I'm also very excited to tell you about BNB and how special and unique it is. Building on this, both as an investor and as CEO of a leading digital asset treasury, I see a need to focus on a small number of truly special and unique crypto assets, because not all crypto assets are created equal. You and I both know BNB—there's something special about it. It's certainly outperformed Bitcoin over the past few months; from the outset, it's been one of the few assets that could outperform Bitcoin. When you think about digital asset treasuries and this new wave, how do you view this market and the opportunities it presents?
CZ: There's a lot to unpack here. Let's return to the starting point: humans tend to understand things through "categorization" because it's easier, like "traditional finance vs. Web3" and "Web2 vs. Web3." But there really are no boundaries: ultimately, it's all finance, just using different technologies. Traditional finance can certainly use blockchain technology; banks can use blockchain technology; and crypto companies should also be deeply integrated with traditional financial markets and market structures. We shouldn't draw lines between them, but rather fully integrate them—the terminology is just for easier understanding. In this sense, crypto companies should integrate into existing markets (raising funds, finding developers, and acquiring resources), while existing financial markets should also use new technologies. Regarding Michael Saylor, my intuition is that he became active in the public eye around 2017-2018, possibly even earlier. Once he understood something, he had a very strong conviction. We've experienced this ourselves: first learning, then "converting" or "completely converting." Becoming a firm believer allows us to navigate volatility because we can see the longer term future, not the prices of tomorrow or the day after tomorrow (which are unpredictable), but the trends five or ten years from now. This is fascinating. Saylor invented a new structure. He did try to explain it at various times, but I didn't quite get it, but I salute him. This new structure allows crypto companies to raise capital from traditional markets. Traditional markets are much larger, and many investors can buy company stocks but not directly invest in crypto. Buying stocks indirectly related to crypto provides a convenient entry point into Web3. Once they have this indirect exposure, they'll continue to pay attention to crypto and help the ecosystem grow.
CZ: In this regard, Saylor has built one of the most successful companies in the world using a very simple strategy. While he's a die-hard Bitcoin fan (a Bitcoin Maxi, focusing solely on Bitcoin), there are other very successful cryptocurrencies, including BNB and many other public chains. Looking at the success of Binance (a centralized exchange), if it had only listed Bitcoin, it wouldn't have been as successful; it's precisely because it lists a variety of assets that it has attracted so many users to crypto. You and I both agree that BNB has performed strongly and has many use cases. We're at the intersection you mentioned: connecting traditional finance with Web3 finance. Tools like DATs allow crypto companies to access traditional market capital and allow traditional markets to participate in crypto, which is a win-win situation. The more people who have access to BNB or other crypto assets (either directly or indirectly), the more they contribute to the crypto ecosystem. This is a mutually beneficial situation: once companies or investors gain indirect exposure to BNB, they may refer friends; if they meet developers, they may ask, "Why not develop your protocol on BNB?" "Why not use BNB for this?" "Why not use another crypto asset for that?" This helps the ecosystem grow. It's important to understand that in a decentralized world, it's not driven by any one company or individual. I don't "drive" everything about BNB; I do my part, but I don't manage everyone in the ecosystem, and they don't report to me. The more people align their incentives with the ecosystem, the more they'll contribute, which in turn helps everyone in the ecosystem. Even in a decentralized world, if we can help more people achieve mutual symbiosis, it will drive ecosystem growth. So I think this is a great thing: Michael Saylor pioneered it, and now we're adopting it, and you're leading the charge. That's fantastic.
David: Thank you for your recognition. Like the various crypto cycles we've discussed, this is an unexpected path. You've spent a lot of time communicating with governments and company leaders. We've long envisioned a day when governments would buy digital assets like Bitcoin, Ethereum, and BNB. But we didn't realize at the time that there would be a "corporate form" whose goal was to maximize the number of Bitcoin or BNB per share, accumulating these assets and becoming very large holders. This provides investors with an incredible way to gain exposure to these assets and the ecosystem. More importantly, as you mentioned, gaining this exposure leads to a deeper immersion in the ecosystem, creating a unique "flywheel."
David: I often cite the example of El Salvador (from our visit together a few years ago). El Salvador did something unique: it adopted Bitcoin and set itself apart. From the perspective of "actually holding Bitcoin," they earned a good return on their dollar investment; but the greater reward was putting themselves on the map and making a name for themselves. They attracted entrepreneurs, developers, and investors from around the world. When 10,000, 20,000, or 100,000 people move into a small country, the compounding effects of scale can fundamentally change a country's trajectory within a generation. We've seen similar phenomena around the world: countries that liberalize regulation, attract innovators, entrepreneurs, and capital, and open their doors to crypto ultimately reap increasing dividends over time.
CZ: Absolutely. I completely agree. Before Michael Saylor, if someone had told me, "I can start a public company and buy crypto assets," I would have thought it was crazy: How could it work? It also reflected my lack of understanding of public and traditional markets. Even though I've worked in fintech for many years, I've never run a public company, so I didn't understand. Saylor is clearly more experienced, and he figured it out. El Salvador is also very interesting: it's a case of very clear leadership—President Bukele. Without his push, we wouldn't be there (why would I be there?); without his push, Binance wouldn't have opened a customer service office there, etc. I think it's a classic example: a country that adopts new technologies quickly or early enough reaps greater dividends.
CZ: Let's look at the United Arab Emirates (UAE). The UAE has always been "pro-crypto and pro-AI," attracting many new entrepreneurs. The UAE doesn't have many natural resources—oil, but not much else; it's a desert. But now it has one (or two) world-class, thriving cities. People love it there, the economy is performing well, and the country is growing rapidly. I believe that countries that adopt technology early and in the right way will grow very fast. This goes back to the innovations we're seeing: RWA, AI, and so on. If countries can adopt these new things, their economies will continue to grow.
David: I like that example, too. UAE's achievements over the past 10-20 years are truly astonishing; growth is compounding. To conclude, could you please share your vision for BNB and the entire crypto ecosystem over the next 10-20 years? How do you view "possibilities and potential"? How would you measure "success"?
CZ: My perspective is: how many people can we help with BNB? Many companies don't focus on poor or underdeveloped countries, like those in Africa and Southeast Asia, because the immediate ROI isn't clear. But if you look at Binance (the company, not the BNB chain), we have a lot of users in Africa today. These users currently generate very little revenue; I believe that in ten years, they will generate a lot of revenue, and there won't be anyone else there. We help them first by connecting them to finance; then, they will reap the rewards, and the platform will be rewarded in an appropriate way. It's a win-win situation.
CZ: The opportunity is greater for BNB because it's a decentralized, open network and protocol. What I want to do is bring the next few billion people into the next wave and provide them with the next phase of new fintech—the "next generation of new fintech." As the world's population is likely to continue to grow, we should empower 10 billion people or more and provide them with financial services. That's the goal I have in mind. It's not a price target, it's not about competing with or surpassing Bitcoin. As you said, BNB has indeed outperformed Bitcoin historically, which is impressive and challenging; but I don't think that's the right benchmark. The right benchmark is how many people we can help as a community. The more people we help, the more people join the community, and that's a self-sustaining phenomenon. We should continue to work on this.
David: I think that's a beautiful answer, thank you. I always try to get everyone to maintain the right mindset: focus on the long term, focus on building, and focus on helping others. It's a beautiful vision.
CZ: Exactly. I think you possess that mindset. You're one of the most positive people I've met in the industry, you've been around a long time, and you have a strong sense of purpose. So when you said you were willing to take the lead, we were all delighted. Whether you need help from me, YZi Labs, or any of our affiliates or teams, we're happy to provide support. We're also very willing to enlist the help of other ecosystem participants, both within the ecosystem and outside of the BNB chain. I believe it's crucial for the entire ecosystem to collaborate and grow. This benefits everyone.
David: Absolutely. This has always been my approach: collaboration. I also like to tell everyone that I've defined "why I love crypto" as: it's the world's most non-zero-sum game. The best players are all striving to gain market share. In fact, I'd like to conclude with another point: think about the next billion, the next two billion people; they will only live in a world where crypto becomes increasingly important. It's a beautiful vision of the future.
CZ: Absolutely, absolutely.
David: CZ, it's my pleasure. It's been a great conversation, thank you. It's been a great discussion.
CZ: Great, thank you very much.
David: See you soon.
