2026-01-11 03:27:12

Something interesting happened recently. A certain project foundation made a decision: to put all the funds originally allocated for marketing dividends into a black hole for permanent destruction.

This is not a temporary measure. In just five days, they completed two rounds of destruction—on January 6th, they destroyed 48,053 tokens, and by January 10th, they added another destruction, with a total of 48,553 tokens permanently removed from circulation. The result? The total circulating supply was cut from 1 million tokens to 470,000, shrinking by more than half.

Some might ask, is this move cost-effective? The project team’s logic is: rather than distributing dividends to the community, it’s better for holders to benefit directly through a deflationary mechanism. Every destruction increases the relative value of the remaining tokens. From another perspective, this is essentially betting on the token’s appreciation—either a strong confidence in its value or an aggressive gamble.

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.

13 Likes

Reward
13
5
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

HashRatePhilosopher

· 1h ago

This move looks like playing the "deflation expectation" trick, but in reality, it's just betting that the token will go up... what if it doesn't? Destroying so aggressively, isn't it using scarcity to artificially push the price up in reverse? Smart or dangerous, it's hard to say. I believe in this logic, but the premise is that the project itself has genuine demand support; otherwise, it's just sand. Half of the circulating supply destroyed in just five days? That’s desperation, even giving up marketing expenses. No hype, no blackening, this is basically putting all chips on the table. If it wins, it's a perfect deflation story; if it loses... well, that would be awkward.

View OriginalReply0

ConsensusDissenter

· 01-11 03:57

I think this is just the gambler's mentality. The so-called "deflation mechanism" sounds nice, but it's actually about crushing one's assets. I've seen this trick too many times. Destroying tokens = positive news? Next time, they'll raise funds again to cut the leeks. Really daring—cutting the circulating supply in half within half a year. If they weren't so confident in their narrative, they'd be out of options already. Wait, two rounds of destruction in five days? Why so urgent? Seems a bit panicked. Changing from dividends to destruction—I just want to ask the community, what do they think? Isn't this just a disguised wage deduction? Playing the "cut the leeks" game under the guise of deflation. I bet five bucks that the next headlines will be "technical upgrade" or "strategic adjustment." It looks very aggressive, but I'm more curious—has the token price gone up? If not, it's just pure scam. This kind of play will eventually cool off sooner or later. It sounds like the project team is all-in on their story, but do the holders really believe it? If they were truly confident, they'd just buy back and list on exchanges directly. Who can't see through just destroying tokens?

View OriginalReply0

GhostInTheChain

· 01-11 03:54

Destroy half of the circulating supply directly? How confident does that make you... or how desperate --- Wait, two rounds of destruction in 5 days... this isn't a bold gamble, it's a real show of confidence --- Switching from dividends to destruction, smart or unlucky, it all depends on what happens next --- Deflation hype is an old trick, but the key is whether someone is willing to take the bait --- I just want to know if these people truly believe in their project or if they're being forced into this move --- Halving the supply... how are you feeling now, coin holders? --- This thing will either take off or flop, there's no middle ground

View OriginalReply0

WhaleWatcher

· 01-11 03:52

Haha, this move is really ruthless, directly cutting half of the circulating supply, betting on confidence. Damn, is this really true? Two rounds of destruction in five days, is the project team playing with fire or do they really have the confidence? I just want to know if they will continue to do so later. If the destruction is ongoing, it’s definitely a killer move. This logic... Instead of distributing dividends, why not let the token appreciate? It sounds like they are betting on popularity. Such thorough destruction, either the founding team is confident and reassured, or they are risking everything. Cut from 1 million to 470,000, this is not a minor adjustment but a major operation, bold enough. Wait, is it really permanently destroyed? Or can it be restored at any time?

View OriginalReply0