token supply

[damar09]

sometimes I think if you look at the amount of token supply in such a large amount that trillions and trillions after the project runs several months or years, the token will be burned, what for if you make tokens with a large supply, but will be burned, ...?

 

[1715394335]

1715394335

[1715394335]

1715394335

[1715394335]

1715394335

[1715394335]

1715394335

[1715394335]

1715394335

[Lagduf]

sometimes I think if you look at the amount of token supply in such a large amount that trillions and trillions after the project runs several months or years, the token will be burned, what for if you make tokens with a large supply, but will be burned, ...?

 

Agreed, i m not seen seeing the main point to create a big supply of token. I just see that a trick that has already made by the developers. We can take a look at pundi and how it was always creating more and more new tokens and then burned it. It looks like the reason for the creation of more supply totally non sense. Some developers said that it's to fit the development of the platform or even to get more adoption.
The total token supply is indeed static but it doesn't mean we need to create more and more supply like some crap projects that even create multi-billion supply which didn't make sense.

[ecnalubma]

sometimes I think if you look at the amount of token supply in such a large amount that trillions and trillions after the project runs several months or years, the token will be burned, what for if you make tokens with a large supply, but will be burned, ...?

 

Probably its a strategy of most projects creating large supply then burn later. They burn tokens for some reason, one is they burn the unsold tokens from crowdfunding and number two in they are trying to make their token scarce by reducing supply.

[damar09]

I only assume that this is madness, if indeed a plan to take advantage, with reason aiming for development / development, it would be better to improve how we market and introduce tokens / coins themselves, so that the price of tokens / coins will look stable and can attract investors to the platform itself, and we are easier to meet our targets in the share market. maybe we can see a BTC inventory that only counts millions can reach prices that are so fantastic for now, with a price of $ 7000- $ 8000

[Kemarit]

sometimes I think if you look at the amount of token supply in such a large amount that trillions and trillions after the project runs several months or years, the token will be burned, what for if you make tokens with a large supply, but will be burned, ...?

 

Right, it doesn't make sense for a token to have a lot of supply in the very beginning. We all know that the value will go down hard. And the only way they can avoid it is by burning their tokens, but why not limit the supply in the beginning. Perhaps it is their plans in the very beginning, to at least bring some hype again specially when they announce their token burning. But I haven't seen a project becoming successful with this strategy though. Better to start small, like BTC, so that the price will steadily increase specially if the project is really that good.

[leowonderful]

Having an extremely high supply might also be something that certain tokens and coins use to inflate their market caps and thus gain a higher ranking on sites like CoinGecko and Coinmarketcap, which is unfortunate but seems true based on recent trends. I'm not a fan of any cryptocurrencies with massive supply for any reason, though, and I tend to stay away from such projects even if they promise to burn a large percentage of those coins or tokens in the future. Just seems very unpractical to me.

[GreatArkansas]

In many cases, burning tokens can help stabilize a coin's value and curb potential price inflation. The stability gives investors a greater incentive to hold the coins and keeps prices at more favorable rates, which therefore keeps network uptime and bandwidth healthy.^[1]
So for me, burning some tokens from the supply is quite good to help the coin's value itself, but there is some cryptocurrency that is burning some tokens with a small amount and you can't really feel the effect of it to the value of the coin. That's why some people are expecting once there are token burnings they started to think that the price or value of the coin will surge high or pump. There's lot of them, most are shitcoins and just making easy money from people, through manipulations.
[1] https://cointelegraph.com/explained/token-burning-explained

[Rodeo02]

sometimes I think if you look at the amount of token supply in such a large amount that trillions and trillions after the project runs several months or years, the token will be burned, what for if you make tokens with a large supply, but will be burned, ...?

 

thats the way to decrease the supply they used it sometimes using buyback option to stablilized the priced and helping it to increase . It will also create hype because low supply means a chance that the pricr might go higher they will just add demand to make it happen.

[minairia3]

sometimes I think if you look at the amount of token supply in such a large amount that trillions and trillions after the project runs several months or years, the token will be burned, what for if you make tokens with a large supply, but will be burned, ...?

 

Actually token supply doesn't matter at all. It's the circulating supply that is needed to watch out for. If the team has a huge token supply even though its billion its fine as long the set up for token economics are strictly follow like team distribution, the token for sale and some marketing funds and development. If the supply circulation is still low and coincide with the market then there is no problem with the price of it.

[Coin_trader]

Burning of tokens is the way developer used to drive the price high. Its corresponds as profit of the project instead of giving dividend to token holder. That being said, they are using the law of supply and demand. It's not totally non-sense for a coin that is mineable or the majority of supply is in lockdown condition. That is the main reason why most project with token feature has a huge amount of supply.

[wajik-tempe]

I think the way of token burning in cryptocurrency is not fair yet , that made the investors are won't to invest when the tokens already burned because the previous holder are buyitng the tokens before the token burned which will really advantage for the previous holder. If the tokens burned by percent , the tokens that held by the holder must be burned by the same percent also, that will make fair. this is my personal opinion, no offense

[sureshnsnet]

The coins burning process helps strengthen the value of those coins/tokens in circulation and improves ratings per coins/tokens with lower outstanding coins/tokens, the net earnings per coins/tokens ratio increases. so nowadays some top coins like XML and more coins burned their coins. 

[naikturun]

most projects develop strategies like this to raise the price of their tokens in the future.
because too much supply can cause the value of tokens to fall, so they anticipate it by burning it, even though it doesn't really affect some tokens with lots of supplies such as NPXS.

[NathanJB]

sometimes I think if you look at the amount of token supply in such a large amount that trillions and trillions after the project runs several months or years, the token will be burned, what for if you make tokens with a large supply, but will be burned, ...?

 

That sounds silly honestly. But that is done when the developers are really having a very hard time putting more value into their coins. So apart from doing more and more developments and promotions and creations of partnerships, they would also resort to burning of tokens. When all the efforts are just not enough, cutting the supply is an option. But even this one is not a guarantee that the token will rise in value.

[Little Mouse]

There are coin win infinite supply like Ethereum, Monero, Hrin etc. I think they are doing well. There is no problem with supply. If the project or the token/coin have real usage, they will be stay on the market. At the long run like after 5 year, infinite supply coin will face inflation.

[Aabcde]

I think that is one marketing method. When there is a large supply, it is possible that the supply can be used to form a community where to airdrop or bounty, the developer must make a calculation. After the community is formed and the market cap is formed, then they raise prices with burn and buyback. Usually like that.
If the supply is low and burned, I think it's funny lol.

[pikkie]

There are coin win infinite supply like Ethereum, Monero, Hrin etc. I think they are doing well. There is no problem with supply. If the project or the token/coin have real usage, they will be stay on the market. At the long run like after 5 year, infinite supply coin will face inflation.

Supposedly with an unlimited supply that makes the price very cheap, circulation can also be dangerous because it can be used to manipulate prices at the exchange, so you better trade on coins that have very limited supply and are difficult to obtain because it will make the price becomes very expensive.

[Little Mouse]

Supposedly with an unlimited supply that makes the price very cheap, circulation can also be dangerous because it can be used to manipulate prices at the exchange, so you better trade on coins that have very limited supply and are difficult to obtain because it will make the price becomes very expensive.

As I said above, infinite supply can be risky for long time. obviously it must have some use cases. On the other hand, without any real use, no coin will be expensive. Because without demand from real use, nothing will happen in the price of the coin.

[Furious 7]

That depends on the project how much they make tokens with the supply they want because the project always uses token lots for something else too.
After the project has been running for a long time, but tokens can also be burned because the reasons for the sales are not fulfilled, they will burn unsold tokens so that this can result in an increase also because the supply of tokens on the market is decreasing.
But sometimes with a lot of supply is not useful because of its large-scale mass sales.

[JeotQ]

sometimes I think if you look at the amount of token supply in such a large amount that trillions and trillions after the project runs several months or years, the token will be burned, what for if you make tokens with a large supply, but will be burned, ...?

 

I think it's uncertainty from the team, they might have thought many investors would grab the tokens a lot but after launch or few years they aren't satisfy with the result so they introduce burn process, it's not a bad idea to burn token supply