If you consider Plasma as the infrastructure of the 'dollar internet', then you cannot expect it to behave like a traditional public blockchain: it won't blossom with a hundred flowers at once, with a thousand DApps ringing in harmony, and new narratives emerging every day. The more realistic path is often the opposite—network effects usually start from a very specific, very high-frequency, and even somewhat 'boring' small scenario, and only then gradually expand into a larger ecosystem. Because the essence of stablecoins is as tools, and for tools to form network effects, they must first become habitual. A14 I want to clarify this: the growth of Plasma will most likely be validated in three scenarios that are 'closer to real demand', and they have clear signals that can be observed.
The first path that is most likely to emerge first: high-frequency transfers and receipts – 'smooth transfers' are more important than 'fast transfers'.
The primary demand of a stablecoin settlement network is transfers. Not speculative transfers, but daily transfers: transfers between friends, merchant receipts, cross-platform settlements, and small high-frequency cross-border remittances. If Plasma wants to first establish the network effect, it must prove that the transfer experience can be stable to the point of 'almost requiring no explanation'. Users do not care about what consensus you use or how many seconds between blocks; they only care about three things: it won't fail when sent, the arrival time is predictable, and the status feedback is clear. If Plasma's transfer failure rate is low enough, the variation in confirmation delays is small enough, and users do not need to prepare additional gas tokens, this scenario will naturally spread, as it is almost a common need for all stablecoin users.
You judge whether it is happening or not. Don't just look at the trading volume spiking on a certain day; look at two stronger signals: first, whether the number of active addresses for transfers continues to grow and has a smooth curve; second, whether the percentiles for confirmation experience are stable (P95/P99 should not fluctuate). As long as these two curves improve, the network effect will have a foundation.
The second path that will follow closely: stablecoin yield entry – letting funds 'stay' is essential for making transfers a habit.
Transfers solve 'can it be used', while yields solve 'why stay'. Without a yield and fund management entry, stablecoins can easily become transient assets: used and then gone; with a simple and easy-to-use yield entry, users will be more willing to keep funds in Plasma. Once retention increases, transfer frequency will naturally rise, and the ecosystem will more easily create internal circulation. Note that the key term here is 'simple and understandable', not 'how high the annualized return is'. Stablecoin users need an explainable interest and fund management experience, not the stimulation of complex strategies.
To determine whether this scenario has taken off, do not be misled by high APY, but look at the retention after the incentive tide recedes: whether the funds remain on the platform after the event ends, and whether the yields can transition from 'subsidy' to 'real interest' gradually. If funds rotate within the Plasma ecosystem after withdrawal instead of directly returning to the original chain or exchange, that is true positive feedback.
The third path is 'harder but most explosive': merchant payments and reconciliation – once established, the moat will become thicker.
Merchant payments are one of the ultimate scenarios for stablecoins, but they will not explode first because they involve more friction in the real world: receipt tools, reconciliation, refunds, risk control, compliance, and whether merchants are willing to switch. However, once Plasma stabilizes the experience and retention on the first two paths, and combines suitable distribution channels, merchant payments will become an amplifier of the network effect. Because once merchant payments are established, users and merchants will pull each other: more users, merchants are willing to accept; more merchants, users will use it more often. At that time, Plasma's competitiveness will no longer be 'on-chain narrative', but rather 'real-world network effects'.
To judge whether merchant payments are gaining momentum, you can look at very simple signals: whether the number of stablecoin receipt addresses and merchant-side activity is steadily growing, whether there are fixed periodic receipt behaviors (rather than one-off activities), and whether there are products closer to real payment systems, such as 'refund/dispute handling/risk control strategies'.