#加密交易平台 After reading this review, what struck me most wasn't the technical difficulty, but the phrase "This car is really out of fuel"—many Builders have collapsed at this point.

Keegan's story is very typical: the product was indeed well-made, the team’s execution was on point, and everything from protocol selection, white paper, to ecosystem partnerships was in place. But when the 2018 bear market hit, everything became irrelevant. The reasons for rejecting funding were all "The project is good, but we’re not investing now," which is quite ironic. The funding dried up → salaries were delayed → morale plummeted → the project disbanded, and the entire chain of logic was painfully clear.

This gave me two main insights:

**First, the cycle is the most unstoppable force.** No matter how good the product is, when market sentiment turns cold, the project can’t be saved. The same applies to following others—sometimes it’s not that you chose the wrong expert, but that the entire market environment at this stage doesn’t guarantee returns. In such times, reducing positions or shifting to a more conservative strategy is often more rational than stubbornly holding on.

**Second, cash flow is always more important than progress bars.** The tragedy of the Loois team stemmed from "blood transfusion" rather than "self-sustaining." Serial entrepreneurs understand this even better—they prioritize ensuring sufficient funds before discussing product iterations. In follow-trading setups, this means even if you are optimistic about a certain trader, you should allocate positions based on your own risk tolerance, rather than going all-in.

Of course, Keegan eventually moved into CEX projects to continue as a Builder, which is also worth learning from. Staying alive is more important than anything else.