When it comes to RWA, everyone's first reaction is the "asset on-chain" trap.

But have you ever thought that some traditional games have already been using the "rights binding" tactic?

Take the restaurant retail stocks in Japan as an example, shareholders who buy the stocks can directly receive consumption vouchers and discount cards, which can be used freely at offline stores. Isn't this just converting "holding stocks" directly into "actual benefits"?

The problem arises - we always feel that rights are something granted by the platform, and only large holders are qualified to receive them.

In fact, the rules in traditional markets are even more transparent: how many shares to hold, what can be exchanged, how to receive them, are all quite clear.

What about the rights of platform tokens in the crypto space? To be honest, they are more like policy tools dictated by the "platform."

Transaction fee discounts, empty investment qualifications, VIP thresholds, sound quite like benefits, but the core issue is — these things are rarely explicitly stated in the agreements.

Today it opens for you, but tomorrow the conditions may change; this batch of users is here, but the next batch may not be. The rules are changing all the time, it all depends on how the platform adjusts.

So don't just look at the surface of the "rights" term; you need to see whether these rights are guaranteed by the agreement or determined by the platform's mood. Stability and transparency are the real points worth paying attention to.