2026-01-13 14:33:49

Now might be a good time to rethink developer incentive models. If deployment fees are reduced to zero, how can developers and project teams achieve sustainable revenue? One idea is to require all deployers to participate in the main interaction mechanisms within the ecosystem (such as staking, liquidity provision, or specific trading behaviors) to earn rewards. This approach not only lowers the entry barrier but also ensures that participants are deeply integrated into the ecosystem. In other words, no longer relying on upfront fees for profit, but instead earning through ecosystem activity—more participation and greater contributions lead to higher rewards. This model encourages long-term commitment, but the prerequisite is that the ecosystem itself must be sufficiently attractive.

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

9 Likes

Reward
9
5
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

MetaNomad

· 01-13 15:03

It sounds like we're about to fall into the "zero-fee trap" again. Basically, they lure you in for free at the beginning, then rely on various interaction mechanisms to cut the leeks later. --- This logic is a bit convoluted... Instead of making it so complicated, why not make the cake more transparent? --- The key is whether the ecosystem is strong enough. Otherwise, no matter how many incentives are offered, it’s all in vain, and it ultimately turns into a Ponzi scheme. --- Staking, liquidity, trading... Aren't these just disguises for hidden fees? I can't see how they are more reasonable than deployment costs. --- Yes, yes, long-term commitments sound good, but first, don’t let me lose money, haha. --- If the ecosystem is truly valuable, people will come even without paying; if it’s not valuable, no amount of incentives can save it—that’s the real truth.

View OriginalReply0

ChainSherlockGirl

· 01-13 15:02

Zero fees? Sounds great, but isn't this just letting the big players decide the fate of the ecosystem... Based on my analysis, projects with real stickiness have been doing this for a long time. The key is that your ecosystem needs to be valuable.

View OriginalReply0

rugpull_ptsd

· 01-13 14:53

Zero fee rates sound great, but isn't it still about the ecosystem attracting users on its own? No matter how much incentives are offered, a chain without real demand is just a waste.

View OriginalReply0

FOMOmonster

· 01-13 14:38

Lowering the fee rate to zero sounds great, but if the ecosystem isn't strong, everything is pointless.

View OriginalReply0

just_here_for_vibes

· 01-13 14:38

Fees are reduced to zero? How can we survive then? In the end, it still depends on the ecosystem itself having popularity.

View OriginalReply0