Jacek.degen.eth 🎩
@jacek
GM Degens, Curious to hear your thoughts on a potential $DEGEN burn. The foundation currently holds 32.5% of the supply. While we could use it for future airdrops (like for the Degen app or other ideas), that would dilute current holders, which doesn’t feel right for those who’ve been hodling. We’ll always need some $DEGEN to keep building, but probably not 30%+. And let’s be honest, that big supply has scared off some new users worried about future inflation. One idea: a phased burn 🔥. Steadily burn tokens monthly until we reach a sustainable amount for years of building, while rewarding long-term holders. We wouldn’t burn everything, but it would shift tokenomics, and likely remove any big airdrops down the line. What do you think: burn or distribute more to the community?
89 replies
34 recasts
241 reactions
Corbin Page
@corbin.eth
Burning tokens rarely has the intended effect. Tokens are not rational markets. I’d recommend keeping it in the Treasury and lowing token allocations instead. For Burns, any fee mechanisms should be taken in ETH or stables and used to buy+burn $DEGEN. Creates buy pressure and lowers supply.
4 replies
0 recast
24 reactions
Ethan666.eth🎩
@ethan666
This some makes sense but very ironic because is see CZ of Binance burns billions in BNBs and the effect is positive and creates long lasting holders that uses this token for collateral and in borrowing mechanism. If degen is the currency for its chain then making hard money should be the goal in the long term.
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction