The revenue-capture thesis
" -> "תזת לכידת ההכנסות
" Then: "Revenue capture isn't a new idea, but it's been slow to take hold. The basic premise: protocols collect fees from users and then distribute some of that income to token holders. Think of it like a dividend, but on-chain. Hougan argues this model will become standard practice across DeFi and layer-1s, not just a niche experiment.
" Translation: "לכידת הכנסות אינה רעיון חדש, אבל היא איטית לתפוס תאוצה. ההנחה הבסיסית: פרוטוקולים גובים עמלות מהמשתמשים ואז מחלקים חלק מההכנסה הזו לבעלי האסימונים. חשבו על זה כמו דיבידנד, אבל על השרשרת. הוגן טוען שהמודל הזה יהפוך לפרקטיקה סטנדרטית ב-DeFi ובשכבות-1, לא רק ניסוי נישתי.
" Note: "on-chain" - "על השרשרת" or "ברשת" but "על השרשרת" is common. "Niche experiment" - "ניסוי נישתי". Next: "Right now, most tokens are valued on speculation and network usage, not on actual cash flow. That's starting to change. A handful of protocols already share trading fees or protocol revenue with stakers and holders. Hougan thinks that's the direction the whole industry is heading.
" Translation: "כרגע, רוב האסימונים מוערכים על ספקולציות ושימוש ברשת, לא על תזרים מזומנים בפועל. זה מתחיל להשתנות. קומץ פרוטוקולים כבר חולקים עמלות מסחר או הכנסות פרוטוקול עם מחזיקים ומחזיקות. הוגן חושב שזה הכיוון שכל התעשייה הולכת אליו.
" Note: "stakers" - "מחזיקים" but actually "stakers" are those who stake, so "מחזיקים" might not be precise. Better: "מחזיקים" is holders, but stakers are "מחזיקים" in the sense of staking. I'll use "מחזיקים" for both, but we can differentiate: "מחזיקים" (holders) and "מחזיקים" (stakers) - but we can say "מחזיקים ומחזיקים" but that's redundant. Actually, "stakers" is "מחזיקים" in the sense of staking, but we can say "מחזיקים" and "מחזיקים" - no. Let's use "מחזיקים" for holders and "מחזיקים" for stakers? That's confusing. In Hebrew, we often say "מחזיקים" for holders, and for stakers we might say "מחזיקים" but actually "stakers" are those who lock tokens, so we can say "מחזיקים" or "מחזיקים" but it's not specific. Alternatively, we can say "מחזיקים ומחזיקים" but that's not good. Let's use "מחזיקים" for holders and "מחזיקים" for stakers? Actually, the word "staker" is often translated as "מחזיק" in the context of staking, but we can say "מחזיקים" and "מחזיקים" - no. Maybe we can say "מחזיקים" for both, but we need to differentiate. In the sentence: "share trading fees or protocol revenue with stakers and holders" - so we have two groups. In Hebrew we can say "עם מחזיקים ומחזיקים" but that's redundant. Better: "עם מחזיקים ומשקיעים" but that's not exact. Actually, "stakers" are those who stake, so we can say "עם מחזיקים" but it's ambiguous. Let's use "עם מחזיקים ומחזיקים" - no. Perhaps we can say "עם מחזיקים" and "עם מחזיקים" but we need two different terms. In Hebrew, we might say "מחזיקים" for holders and "מחזיקים" for stakers? Actually, the verb "להחזיק" means to hold, and "להחזיק" also means to
