I have an idea: this buyback and burn model can indeed create a chain reaction.
According to the current mechanism, destroying 0.1 billion tokens every minute, from another perspective, is like a continuous process of shrinking the circulating supply. Over time, the scarcity keeps increasing, and the supply side is gradually eroded.
The logic behind this design is actually quite clear: reduce the total supply → increase the unit scarcity → theoretically support the price. The key is whether it can be sustained and whether the market truly accepts this logic.
From a purely mechanical perspective, this is indeed more convincing than mere promises. But ultimately, it still depends on the project's fundamentals, ecosystem development, and market recognition.
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.
7 Likes
Reward
7
6
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
OnChainArchaeologist
· 10h ago
This logic sounds good, but can continuous burning really support the price? Or is it just another script for harvesting the little guys again?
View OriginalReply0
HashRateHermit
· 10h ago
Burning is burning, the key is whether the project team is actually putting in real money continuously; otherwise, no matter how beautiful this theory is, it's all nonsense.
View OriginalReply0
DefiVeteran
· 11h ago
Hmm, continuous burning is indeed aggressive. I'm just worried that there might be no liquidity later, which could lead to a dump.
View OriginalReply0
EntryPositionAnalyst
· 11h ago
Sounds good, but how long can the destruction rate of 0.1b/minute last? I'm worried it might end up being all for nothing...
View OriginalReply0
AlphaBrain
· 11h ago
Destroying 0.1b every minute sounds good, but the key is whether the project team can really keep it up.
View OriginalReply0
LiquidationWatcher
· 11h ago
Continuous burning sounds great, but very few projects can truly last until scarcity is released.
I have an idea: this buyback and burn model can indeed create a chain reaction.
According to the current mechanism, destroying 0.1 billion tokens every minute, from another perspective, is like a continuous process of shrinking the circulating supply. Over time, the scarcity keeps increasing, and the supply side is gradually eroded.
The logic behind this design is actually quite clear: reduce the total supply → increase the unit scarcity → theoretically support the price. The key is whether it can be sustained and whether the market truly accepts this logic.
From a purely mechanical perspective, this is indeed more convincing than mere promises. But ultimately, it still depends on the project's fundamentals, ecosystem development, and market recognition.