Wait, something doesn't quite add up here. Everyone's talking about this deflationary model, but are we really expecting mass token burns to drive scarcity?
Here's what bugs me: if the team's doing OTC deals whenever they need operational capital, doesn't that just dump supply back into circulation? The math seems off. You can't claim deflationary tokenomics while simultaneously selling tokens off-market to cover expenses. That's... just inflation with extra steps?
Unless there's a legit burn mechanism tied to revenue or usage that actually outpaces OTC sales, this whole narrative falls apart. Anyone got hard data on the burn rate versus OTC volume?
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.
14 Likes
Reward
14
8
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
AlgoAlchemist
· 11h ago
Another one who opposes the deflationary model... But my brother's logic this time is really not bad. OTC sales to fill holes, the sound of burning coins is all air, I have seen this trick too much. Where is the real data?
View OriginalReply0
WhaleInTraining
· 22h ago
This guy is right. OTC is burning on one side and selling on the other. How do they even do the math? It's just paper shuffling.
View OriginalReply0
LayerZeroJunkie
· 12-08 19:52
ngl this is just a typical case of burning tokens with one hand and selling tokens with the other—a numbers game, that's all.
View OriginalReply0
APY追逐者
· 12-07 12:52
It's the same old rhetoric again... As soon as there's an OTC dump, the burn mechanism is just empty talk. Who would believe it?
View OriginalReply0
MetaMisfit
· 12-07 12:51
Not gonna lie, I'm already tired of hearing this spiel—it's all the same tricks... The burn mechanism gets offset by OTC, there's no way the numbers will actually look good.
View OriginalReply0
ZeroRushCaptain
· 12-07 12:45
Ha, yet another deflationary myth shattered. I've seen this trick many times: OTC dumping plus burn propaganda—it's all just word games.
View OriginalReply0
DeepRabbitHole
· 12-07 12:44
Oh, here we go again with the same rhetoric. Dumping hard on OTC and still have the nerve to talk about deflation? You're just fooling yourself.
View OriginalReply0
LadderToolGuy
· 12-07 12:39
It's the same old "we have black magic deflation" nonsense... As soon as there's OTC selling, the deflation is dead. This logic is full of holes like a sieve.
Wait, something doesn't quite add up here. Everyone's talking about this deflationary model, but are we really expecting mass token burns to drive scarcity?
Here's what bugs me: if the team's doing OTC deals whenever they need operational capital, doesn't that just dump supply back into circulation? The math seems off. You can't claim deflationary tokenomics while simultaneously selling tokens off-market to cover expenses. That's... just inflation with extra steps?
Unless there's a legit burn mechanism tied to revenue or usage that actually outpaces OTC sales, this whole narrative falls apart. Anyone got hard data on the burn rate versus OTC volume?