No. Both models can succeed or fail depending on structure, counterparty quality, and oversight. Problems typically arise not from the model itself, but from misaligned incentives and poor monitoring. A well-structured loan + call option engagement with realistic strikes and strong KPIs can perform excellently. Likewise, a poorly monitored retainer engagement with weak profit-sharing terms can underperform. The model is a framework; execution determines outcomes. That said, if a project has sufficient stablecoin reserves, retainer + working capital engagements are generally preferable because they offer stronger incentive alignment and lower token price risk. The fundamental tradeoff is clear: Retainer + working capital is risky for your stablecoin treasury, while loan + call option is risky for your token price. The practical constraint is that most projects do not have unlimited stablecoins, which is why loan + call option structures remain prevalent.