After Plasma showcased the market last night, the next object of FOMO for everyone is likely to be @stable. After all, Tether has only invested in these two, whether it's a race or nurturing, the targets are just these two. Currently, Stable is lagging behind Plasma in terms of ecosystem development, testnet/mainnet progress, and other aspects, but that doesn't matter. Just like Arb and OP, whoever goes live first, the other will likely try to benchmark against you when they launch, at least they won't be off by an order of magnitude. Let’s briefly discuss the similarities and differences between these two. Similarities: 1. Both are EVM compatible, 0Gas to U, high performance, and can be seen as POS chains (although Plasma is a BTC sidechain, it is essentially still a POS). 2. Both are backed by Tether and Bitfinex. Differences: 1. Investment institutions (besides Bitfinex) - Plasma is backed by Framework and Founders Fund, while Stable is backed by Hack and Franklin Templeton - Plasma is better. 2. Main style - Plasma clearly leans towards a To C style, with cooperation with Binance, AAVE and other major DeFi players joining in at the first opportunity, Plasma One card design, etc. Stable, on the other hand, walks on two legs: To B and To C, and various materials clearly show its friendliness towards institutions. The recent collaboration with Paypal to introduce PYUSD into Stable is a prime example. So currently, Plasma leans towards To C, Stable combines BC, Tempo leans towards To B, and Arc... it's hard to say, it's too early, but it’s likely to be more To B like Tempo. Just a wild guess that @Stable's TGE and mainnet will be around the end of the year.