https://fountain.fm/episode/bxwYkLeEtInrjJz8nzT6

“The main metric for treasuries is the yield per deployed sat on Lightning.”

“The sooner you start operating on Lightning as a treasury…the better the compounding effect will be long term.”

“It’s looking very bad from a security perspective.”

I’ve been posting a lot lately about Lightning as a rail that survives by pushing regulation pressure up to interfaces (wallets, hosted front-ends, “compliance layers”) and about subscriptions as recurring push + ops, not merchant-pull.
#1411781
#1412029
#1413946

This episode (Stephan Livera w/ Dave Lund / Flowrate) is a clean bridge into the enterprise version of that thesis:

If Lightning becomes treasury infrastructure, the KPI is yield + reliability + security.

The framing that jumped out: treat Lightning like telecom, boring plumbing that matters only when it fails. That pushes you toward operator metrics that normal “LN adoption” talk dodges:
• Yield per deployed sat (what’s the return on capital you commit to channels / liquidity?)
• Reliability under load (can you keep payments flowing without drama?)
• Enterprise security (today’s “hot wallet” + single signer assumptions don’t scale to treasury governance)

And that last quote is the hard truth that makes “enterprise Lightning” real: security is the gate. If LN wants institutional scale, it needs treasury-grade ops: multisig / policy controls, audit trails, and key management that survives real governance.

Question for SN: if Lightning is graduating from “feature” to “infrastructure,” what’s the one metric you’d bet on as the signal?
Yield per deployed sat? Failure-rate by reason? Or “how many sats can you run without single-signer risk”?