Yesterday, Alpha officially launched a new points system starting from the THQ project. With this adjustment, it can be said that some people are happy while others are worried.

1. Why are there 'some people happy'?

The core reason for supporters is the change in the revenue structure.

Although 30 points need to be deducted for a single withdrawal, the actual income is mostly around 45–80 dollars, which is considered a solid 'medium profit'. Compared to previous projects that only had small profits of 15–20 dollars, there is actually no significant disadvantage in absolute income and certainty, and even better stability.

From this perspective, although points are deducted more, the value per unit project has increased, thus gaining some user recognition.

Two, why are 'some people worried' again?

The key issue is: The speed of point acquisition is obviously lagging behind the speed of consumption.

If every time starts at 30 points, and point growth is limited, users can only be forced to:

  • Higher trading volume

  • Withstand higher wear costs

  • Exchange funding efficiency for point earning speed

This will inevitably form a new internal competition relationship.

Looking back at the development path of Alpha, it is actually not unfamiliar:

  • In the earliest stage, everyone was swiping 256 points, 512 points

  • Later gradually evolved to transaction volume thresholds of 16,000, 32,000

  • The last reform directly eliminated a large number of users at the 100 balance level

So the question arises:

This time, will it further eliminate users at the 1000 balance level?

Three, THQ's 'first mover advantage' and subsequent risks

THQ, as the first project to adopt the new point model, naturally possesses a first-mover advantage:

  • The market has not fully adapted to the 30-point threshold

  • The psychological expectation of points still stays in the old stage

  • Project airdrop value is relatively higher

But once users form a habit of 'deducting 30 points', the situation may change:

  • The value corresponding to 30 points may gradually decline to $20–40

  • High-value projects will become increasingly scarce

In other words, early benefits ≠ long-term norm.

Four, logical reasoning from the platform's perspective

Every reform of Alpha is clearly not a spur-of-the-moment decision, but based on a large number of data models:

  • The supply quantity of subsequent new Alpha projects

  • The scale of the existing participating population

  • The consumption speed of user points

  • User distribution across different trading volume ranges

From the platform's perspective, the current core contradiction is:

The number of projects is already difficult to digest the point stock in users' hands.

Therefore, by increasing single point consumption:

  • Use fewer projects to complete more point recovery

  • Force users to increase trading volume

  • Amplify the overall trading data of the platform

This is almost a win-win solution in mechanism design.

Five, what does it mean for ordinary users?

It can be basically confirmed that:

  • 15 points, with good luck can get $60–80 for a big reward, it will be extremely difficult to replicate in the future

  • The new normal will be: Starting from 30 points

  • Occasionally, big rewards at the hundred-dollar level may still appear, but the probability will clearly decrease

Once everyone gets used to '30 points per claim', the average value of airdrops will inevitably decrease.

Six, summary: The trend is set, it will only get more intense

Overall:

  • The Alpha point system is continuously upgrading

  • The intensity of competition will only continue to increase

  • The larger the fund size and the higher the funding efficiency, the more advantageous it is

For participants, the future competition is no longer just about 'luck', but about:

Fund size × trading strategy × cost control ability

The threshold for Alpha is being gradually raised.