2026-01-11 16:23:13

A conversation on the subway during rush hour made me reevaluate the design logic of a certain Web3 project.

Two young people sitting next to me were discussing an event. "Participated in that Walrus event, it felt like hitting the lottery," one said, "I only put in 800 bucks."

"How about the rebates?"

"It's not about how much the rebate is, but the system behind it," the other continued. "This round of the event has a release of 300,000 tokens, and as long as you participate, there's a guaranteed minimum reward—last time, the minimum was close to 180 bucks. To earn more, you need to rank higher; the first prize can get you 500 bucks."

"Who provides the money? Is it reliable?"

"The total pool is 50 billion tokens, with 53% allocated to the community. The more people use it, the more the token burn mechanism activates, making tokens more scarce. The staking annual yield alone ranges from 18% to 25%. The entire design logic is to build a sustainable profit-generating mechanism."

I got off at the next station, but the thought process from that conversation stayed with me.

The most attractive part of the Walrus project lies precisely in its consideration of token economics— the design of the 300,000 token prize pool ensures that the entry barrier for new users is low enough; the 53% community distribution ratio guarantees value flows to token holders; and the 18%-25% staking yield, combined with the burn mechanism, forms a closed loop. This is not just simple event marketing but an ecosystem operating system built around scarcity and participation incentives.

Sometimes, the biggest opportunity is hidden in such casually mentioned, fragmentary discussions about system design.

WAL-0,94%

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.

10 Likes

Reward
10
6
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

MoonlightGamer

· 01-11 16:53

You can even encounter investment experience sharing on the subway偶遇, these days the market is really competitive even on the bus Walrus's approach is basically using scarcity to trap people's hearts, 18%-25% annualized sounds great but the destruction mechanism must outperform The temptation of a guaranteed 180 to reach 500 is indeed fierce, but I'm just worried that retail investors are still the same bunch of leeks in the end I've seen quite a few projects with this kind of design logic, the key is how long the project team can sustain 53% allocated to the community sounds generous, but it really depends on whether big players will dump I just want to know if this 50 billion token pool is really liquidity or just on paper It looks a bit mysterious, but don’t be blinded by the low threshold, I’ve stepped on a few pits with projects like this Honestly, this logical design is quite clever, but luck probably plays a significant role too

View OriginalReply0

FlashLoanLarry

· 01-11 16:53

Subway eavesdropping economics, I like this vibe. 800 yuan threshold, guaranteed minimum of 180, staking with an annualized rate of 25%... Honestly, I’ve really understood this logic. However, regarding the destruction mechanism, the more tokens used, the scarcer they become. It depends on whether the subsequent real traffic can support it. This is the brilliance of Web3—apparent activity, but actually building a self-sustaining system. An annualized return of 18% to 25% sounds impressive, but the key is whether the tokens themselves will eventually become worthless... Token holders receive 53% of the distribution, which is basically just a big pie in the sky for the community members who are being used as leeks. It’s essentially a more sophisticated Ponzi scheme, just packaged more nicely. The guaranteed minimum reward design indeed lowers the participation threshold, but there will always be someone to take over. The Walrus case is worth pondering, but it will be meaningful only after surviving and operating for three years.

View OriginalReply0

HodlVeteran

· 01-11 16:47

$800 entry, 25% annualized return, guaranteed minimum of 180... sounds just like the dozens of projects I fell into back in the day, old tricks wrapped in a fresh skin. Who provides the money is a good question. I just want to ask honestly—are the destruction mechanisms to support the market reliable, or is this another round of the golden cicada shedding its shell to cut losses? This "sustainable profit-making mechanism" sounds suspicious. I believed in it back in 2018 too, losing over 200,000 in the process. --- Really, no matter how clever the design, it can't withstand a simple reality: the money the people in front make is the money the people behind lose. Early participants will always be the winners, newbies... haha. --- Wait, that 53% community distribution number sounds so familiar. Feels like every project says the same thing. --- Young people, stop going all-in. I was fooled into this kind of "closed-loop design" back in the day, and now that coin is still gathering dust in my wallet. --- The investment advice heard on the subway is the most deadly, often the most tempting. My blood and tears, everyone.

View OriginalReply0

Whale_Whisperer

· 01-11 16:46

You can hear these kinds of discussions even on the subway, which shows that Walrus is really breaking into the mainstream... That 18%-25% staking annualized return is indeed quite impressive. --- The 800 yuan threshold + a guaranteed minimum of 180, I need to think about this logic, it doesn't seem like the old trick of cutting leeks. --- Burn mechanism + community distribution 53%, wait, isn't this just reinforcing scarcity? Quite interesting. --- The most outrageous thing is that this guy on the subway explained tokenomics better than many project documents... What does that indicate? --- But a reliable earning mechanism requires continuous participation; otherwise, it's just a game of musical chairs. --- The total market cap of 50 billion feels not that exaggerated; the key is whether liquidity can support it. --- Why do I feel that the most interesting things in Web3 all start from some casual ramblings that become popular?

View OriginalReply0

MeaninglessGwei

· 01-11 16:40

What I hear on the subway is the most authentic. This logic of destruction + staking is indeed quite interesting. The low threshold of 800 is key. The real trick is how to keep you playing continuously. 18% to 25% annualized? Not many projects still dare to claim that now. We'll have to see if they can hold up later.

View OriginalReply0

retroactive_airdrop

· 01-11 16:39

Just by listening to a hot chat on the subway, you can understand the token model clearly. This is true design sense. 800 yuan to enter the track with a guaranteed minimum of 180, and staking can earn 18%. The logic is indeed excellent. I need to study Walrus's destruction mechanism; it doesn't feel like the old tricks of cutting leeks. Wait, that 53% community allocation—why does this number feel so familiar... another "decentralization" story? It feels like a textbook example of building a self-sustaining economy, worth paying attention to. By the way, a staking annualized return of 25%—if it can stay steady, it's a good choice after exiting the track. Token destruction + scarcity—finally someone understands this logic. As long as the mechanism can run, low participation threshold is the strongest moat. The profit mechanism operates autonomously, sounds great... but the key is whether there are real application scenarios to support it.

View OriginalReply0