If we look at Web3 from the perspective of real brands, I have always felt there is a deliberately overlooked issue:
It's not that brands don't want to enter #Web3 ; rather, it's that Web3 is too 'not something brands should use.'
Wallet, private key, Gas, chain selection, asset custody...
When these words emerge, the overwhelming first reaction from most brands is only one:
Forget it, let's wait and see.
In my view, the truly smart aspect of Vanar is not shouting 'empower brands,' but acknowledging a fact:
What brands want is not to go on-chain, but to 'seamlessly integrate.'
1. What real brands truly resist is never the technology, but the risks and fragmentation.
I have talked with many brands, and the conclusion is actually very consistent.
What they care about is not TPS or decentralization level, but three more practical issues:
• Will users churn?
• Will the experience be interrupted?
• Will brand control be diluted?
Most Web3 solutions fail on these three points.
because they assume users are willing to pay the extra learning cost for 'blockchain identity'.
But the users of real brands are not crypto-native; they seek smoothness, familiarity, and frictionlessness.
Vanar's entry point happens to step on this pain point.
2. Vanar's seamless integration into Web3 is essentially a reconstruction of the experience layer
I prefer to understand what Vanar provides to brands as a set of experiential toolkits rather than a tech stack.
Its logic is not:
Brands adapt to blockchain
But rather:
Blockchain adapts to brands' existing processes
From the user's perspective, there is almost no 'switching feeling':
• No forced understanding of wallets
• No requirement to recognize asset types
• Do not interrupt the existing interaction path
Blockchain only works in the background, responsible for recording, rights confirmation, and settlement.
This design is completely different in terms of safety for real brands.
3. Brands do not need 'Web3 transformation', just need 'capability upgrade'
One judgment I strongly agree with is:
Successful Web3 integration should look like a product upgrade, not a strategic shift.
Vanar's solution is precisely developed around this idea.
What brands have been doing—
• Membership system
• Digital content
• Fan interaction
• Virtual goods
• Cross-platform experience
Vanar did not ask them to start over,
But rather allows these behaviors to have verifiable, inheritable, and combinable properties for the first time.
For brands, this is not 'entering Web3', but suddenly realizing:
My original data has begun to have long-term value.
4. The true meaning of 'seamless' is that users do not feel the 'new system'
Many projects claim 'non-sensory', but very few actually achieve it.
Vanar's 'seamless' is reflected in a very detailed place:
Users do not need to change their behavioral habits.
They still:
• Log in with familiar accounts
• Complete interactions in a familiar interface
• Participate in activities within a familiar brand context
It is just that these behaviors are recorded by Vanar as a sustainable state.
When blockchain is only responsible for 'backing', and does not interfere with the experience, it can be adopted on a large scale.
5. Why this solution is particularly suitable for entertainment, IP, and consumer brands
I have observed that Vanar is particularly suited for three types of brands:
1️⃣ Entertainment and IP parties
They need long-term interaction, not one-time sales.
Vanar can solidify fan behavior into 'identity history', rather than marketing data.
2️⃣ Consumer brands
Membership systems are naturally suitable for on-chain rights confirmation but fear complex experiences the most.
Vanar addresses 'verifiable + non-disruptive'.
3️⃣ Digital native brands
They are already dealing with virtual assets, just lacking a long-term credible underlying.
Vanar is more like completing infrastructure rather than subverting it.
The common point of these brands is:
They care about relationships, not just transactions.
6. The real role of VANRY in the brand system
From the brand perspective, $VANRY is not something that 'makes users speculate'.
It is more like a backend coordinating resources:
• Used to drive system operation
• Used for settling real interactions
• Used to maintain long-term stability of the ecosystem
Brands do not even need to make tokens a front-end selling point.
It just needs to know:
This system has a long-term, sustainable value center.
and users only feel that the experience is getting better.
7. Why I think this is much more mature than 'brands issuing NFTs'
To be honest, I have always been reserved about brand NFTs.
It is not that the concept is wrong, but that the path is too jumpy.
Directly making users pay for 'ownership',
but have not solved the problems of interaction, experience, and relationships.
#vanar The path looks more like a reverse:
First deepen the interaction, then let the value naturally emerge.
When ownership comes from real participation rather than marketing gimmicks, it can stand firm.
8. Moon's judgment
If you ask me, what is the greatest value of Vanar to real brands?
I would say it is not 'decentralization', but reducing the friction cost of entering the future.
It allows brands to operate without changing themselves or taking huge risks,
Having the ability of #Web3 will only become apparent in the era.
This path will not experience explosive growth nor create short-term myths.
But it is highly likely to become one of the default ways for brands to enter Web3 in the coming years.
Truly successful infrastructure is never about making people exclaim 'this is good Web3',
but rather makes people unaware—
They are already using Web3.
Vanar, it seems, is on this path now.