Token burning

[magnum cyber]

A token burn is still useless if there is no demand for the token. Most projects do a token burn hoping that the price will rise due to less token circulation but this doesn't work if there is no demand.

It's the most useless process i have ever seen around in economical aspects.

But if everything is fine, and with a good information background with progress in and compliance with the roadmap, then burning coins does its job. It all depends on the seriousness of the project)

nothing is good even if it's a serious project, usually burning tokens doesn't always yield sweet results. I think all of that only depends on market demand. if the token decreases but there is no market demand then the market product also cannot function properly.

[1714831916]

1714831916

[1714831916]

1714831916

[1714831916]

1714831916

[1714831916]

1714831916

[1714831916]

1714831916

[1714831916]

1714831916

[SistaFista]

A token burn is still useless if there is no demand for the token. Most projects do a token burn hoping that the price will rise due to less token circulation but this doesn't work if there is no demand.

It's the most useless process i have ever seen around in economical aspects.

But if everything is fine, and with a good information background with progress in and compliance with the roadmap, then burning coins does its job. It all depends on the seriousness of the project)

nothing is good even if it's a serious project, usually burning tokens doesn't always yield sweet results. I think all of that only depends on market demand. if the token decreases but there is no market demand then the market product also cannot function properly.

At least a good project with demand and token burn is better than a project with demand but without token burn.
The most important thing is the project itself indeed, token burn is useless if the project doesnt doing well.
and binance is the good example of a good demanded project with demand and burn.

[Greatchu]

Token burn feature is just a feature for a coin that already has a very good use case, it shouldn't be compared with projects that rely entirely on burning feature, what is more important here is the use case and  burning off tokens is not a good use case

[SheriffEl]

A token burn is still useless if there is no demand for the token. Most projects do a token burn hoping that the price will rise due to less token circulation but this doesn't work if there is no demand.

It's the most useless process i have ever seen around in economical aspects.

Aside from that, it is useless when there is no real use case for that token. As what others already had mentioned. So even if the team is burning some of their supply but it is only use for trading, I don't think the price will increase with only that reason. It should find a real application in the market to create real demand. I think that's very simple to understand.

In my opinion, the whole point of burning is that it's connected with the product somehow and that that product has demand. If not, i completely agree that its useless, but in that case also token is useless, so you cant say that burning use useless

[Gudubobo]

Token burn is very essential to effect the value of any coin. A project with high volume of coins in circulation should do a token burn so as to reduce the tokens thereby giving it a high chance to be wanted in the market. Less token, high demand and this will effect the skyrocketing of the coin price.

[South Park]

The deflationary model was popular in 2019! But the idea was pure garbage, almost every deflation projects are dying or they have zero volume! I have no clue that How can a self-destructive model be good in the crypto industry? I saw Nuke, Blockburn, Fuze, Burst and so on and now they all become shit project!

It is not, but truth to be told it was a new idea and people love the hype, also one of the many reasons why bitcoin is valuable is its limited supply so people thought that if the supply of a coin went down instead of up this will make it more valuable, but obviously they forgot that even if bitcoin had an unlimited supply it will still be valuable because of its use case, however the fact the supply is limited only makes it even more valuable and raises the demand even more, but in the case of those tokens since there is no demand then their supply is irrelevant to their value.

[Nasonn]

Tokens burn is a good strategy which reduces token circulation. This may or may not affect the price of the token in question. Projects should mint reasonable token supply not to burn some at some point.

[firmino10]

I think it is a really good way to increase the value of the project because when you burn the tokens you are reducing the token supply of the token. And when the demand is more than the supply then the price will automatically increase.

[flagpara]

Hey


I have noticed a few projects that developed a deflation system for their coins/tokens called burning.

They burn their tokens on a special occasion or simply when someone pays their product with the native token. They burn few percent of the price.

What do you think about this? Imo, if people actually buy the produc then it can really reflect the price of a coin?

Let me know what you think.

Token burning process is very good for legit project to push price up. All burning process has some system, isn't so easy to understand. I would suggest you to start from Ferrum network. They will burn their transaction cost token as running token price in the exchange. As history some projects reveal new supply without any reason.

[sahadat]

Token burning process has been tried in the market so far but no one has succeeded. Most of used token burning process only for useless project . It,s not just token price up the market that the tokens are burning . It just makes hype for newbies . If a project is useful for humans, then it does not require burning . The value of these projects is greatly increased for the needs of the people.

[Lexurdania]

Token burning process has been tried in the market so far but no one has succeeded. Most of used token burning process only for useless project . It,s not just token price up the market that the tokens are burning . It just makes hype for newbies . If a project is useful for humans, then it does not require burning . The value of these projects is greatly increased for the needs of the people.

Token burning was not successful because the project was not good. Some projects that do token burning can attract investors and influence the price movement. I think that any strategy taken by the developer team will have no effect unless the project can produce a good product

[rnsribeiro]

Token burning process has been tried in the market so far but no one has succeeded. Most of used token burning process only for useless project . It,s not just token price up the market that the tokens are burning . It just makes hype for newbies . If a project is useful for humans, then it does not require burning . The value of these projects is greatly increased for the needs of the people.

Token burning was not successful because the project was not good. Some projects that do token burning can attract investors and influence the price movement. I think that any strategy taken by the developer team will have no effect unless the project can produce a good product

Yeah, a good project is way more that just a good dev team.
You can tell just by looking at ethereum - damn they got the most devs than any crypto company out there, but eth is not top1.
I respect that its daily trading volume went really high lately, but its market cap is far away from btc.
And I think it is all about lack of good marketing.
bitcoin promotes itself since people doing memes, news and etc just to be involved in "crypto world"

[MUG1WARA]

all depends on demand in the market, if there is a lot of demand then the team burns the token then the price will increase but if on the contrary the token burn will only be crap

[quality.crypto]

Token burning process has been tried in the market so far but no one has succeeded. Most of used token burning process only for useless project . It,s not just token price up the market that the tokens are burning . It just makes hype for newbies . If a project is useful for humans, then it does not require burning . The value of these projects is greatly increased for the needs of the people.

Token burning was not successful because the project was not good. Some projects that do token burning can attract investors and influence the price movement. I think that any strategy taken by the developer team will have no effect unless the project can produce a good product

A company with strong platform should always build their project according to their roadmap and in this way, the burning model will help the project to increase the price. Without developing it is impossible for the coin to sustain in the market even though they are burning the coins.

[rdewilde]

Hey


I have noticed a few projects that developed a deflation system for their coins/tokens called burning.

They burn their tokens on a special occasion or simply when someone pays their product with the native token. They burn few percent of the price.

What do you think about this? Imo, if people actually buy the produc then it can really reflect the price of a coin?

Let me know what you think.

The idea of burning is to reduce the supply of the token which will then result in a more valuable token, that is increase in price, but even with this, if the team aren't up and doing towards making the platform valuable, then burning will not have any positive effect on the price. That is to say, the most important thing is the team working on their platform irrespective of the whether burning is done occasionally or when goods and services are being purchased with the platform's token, so that the idea behind the token burn will be achieved.

[shaheer001]

Token burning only works in those project which is already in a strong position like BNB, CRPT as when they burn some percentage of token that directly impact on the token price and price move up, But if a project is already dead then the token burning will never effect on its value or price.

[tvplus006]

Burning of tokens is one of the token mechanics that is used to ensure that there is a shortage of tokens in the ecosystem hence increasing demand for the little available. This goes a long way to increase the liquidity of the token hence giving long term holders profits.

I read such information that tokens are burned that are not implemented as a result of the ICO. This is really the right decision that reduces the number of coins issued. But when these coins are burned later, it does not increase their price. And this is surprising, because the burning process reduces the number of coins and this should affect the price change.

[Mianae]

Buying tokens because they're to be burnt down s not reflect on price. Token burns most time don't push price of tokens up, it's utility and hype that does this. If a token is not used for multiple purpose and don't also have community to pump the price up, token burn won't do anything different to the price.

[matchi2011]

Token burning only works in those project which is already in a strong position like BNB, CRPT as when they burn some percentage of token that directly impact on the token price and price move up, But if a project is already dead then the token burning will never effect on its value or price.

The after effects of any project that doing this kind of actions still depends with the developments of the coin, same with your perceptions those
coins that don't have any contributions and already classified as dead projects even they've tried to attract investors by burning portions of their
coin supplies investors are still at doubt that there's any impact that will take place, with a lots of competitions investors will always look for much
higher opportunities.

[Crypto_lion]

Yeah the sole purpose of token burning is to alter the price of the coin by suppressing the supply of the tokens in the market. It is kind of like an inorganic growth which adds nothing to the project /product that they are trying to develop. The only beneficiary are the token holders who bought it during the ico and lost their money.some respite for them.