Futures
Access hundreds of perpetual contracts
TradFi
Gold
One platform for global traditional assets
Options
Hot
Trade European-style vanilla options
Unified Account
Maximize your capital efficiency
Demo Trading
Introduction to Futures Trading
Learn the basics of futures trading
Futures Events
Join events to earn rewards
Demo Trading
Use virtual funds to practice risk-free trading
Launch
CandyDrop
Collect candies to earn airdrops
Launchpool
Quick staking, earn potential new tokens
HODLer Airdrop
Hold GT and get massive airdrops for free
Launchpad
Be early to the next big token project
Alpha Points
Trade on-chain assets and earn airdrops
Futures Points
Earn futures points and claim airdrop rewards
More
ETHGas's Open Gas Initiative makes on-chain interactions smoother — it's an interesting idea.
The core concept is clear: encourage various protocols and projects to proactively cover users' gas fees. This way, users can directly experience the product without being deterred by high transaction costs. It sounds simple, but actual implementation requires cooperation from participating protocols.
For protocols looking to improve user experience and lower entry barriers, this is an opportunity. Sponsoring gas fees is essentially an investment in user acquisition — more direct than traditional marketing. Once users get started, their stickiness usually increases.
Protocols interested in participating can take action now. With more initiatives like this, the overall user experience of the ecosystem can be elevated.
If protocols dare to really foot the bill, user experience can indeed take off.
Honestly, it still depends on who is willing to pay, a game of capital.
As long as the gas problem isn't solved, newcomers will never be able to come in.
The sponsorship fee sounds good, but I'm worried it will eventually become a honey trap before cutting the leeks.
This logic is just making the protocol the scapegoat, quite interesting.
Only when it’s truly implemented does it count; don’t let it be another PPT project.
If gas can be saved, who would still play on L1? It should have been played this way a long time ago.
Protocols need to be willing to spend money if they truly want to improve; just talking nicely isn't enough.
It sounds easy to say but hard to do. How many protocols are truly willing to spend money?
If this can be rolled out successfully, it could definitely attract a lot of newcomers to give it a try.
Basically, the project team pays the costs themselves to increase user stickiness, which seems worthwhile.
The feeling of being scared away time and time again is really uncomfortable, but now at least I can start playing directly.
The key is to see how many projects are truly willing to foot the bill. It seems most will still do the math.
---
Honestly, it depends on whether the protocols are willing to spend this money, after all, the benefits come from the users
---
The core idea is still to reduce customer acquisition costs, similar to zero-cost entry, but at least someone is paying
---
If major protocols follow suit, the ecosystem experience can really improve. The question is, are there that many sponsors?
---
Finally, someone thought of giving new users a free pass, much better than those harvesting projects
---
Sounds great, but it depends on how many reliable projects will actually participate. Don’t end up just a passing trend
Gas fees are essentially an entry barrier. Now that someone is helping to pay for them, the supply and demand curve instantly changes. This logic is sound.
The question is, how many protocols are actually willing to foot the bill for this? Most still just want to free ride on this wave of traffic.
If it can be successfully implemented, it perfectly exemplifies the Web3 decentralization spirit—using economic incentives to replace traditional intermediaries, with that authentic vibe.
But don't expect gas fees to disappear; that's impossible. At best, it just shifts the cost from users to project teams. Schrödinger's bull market, indeed.