Burning plans

[tvplus006]

It's usually better to buy the coin before the burning since burning is done in the first place to reduce the supply so that the price of the token/coin itself would rise up

This is not the case of shitcoins.

I just wonder why they need to have big supply and then burning it when they one first hand itself, can create a coin/token with less supply?

Burning is for deceiving and definitely not a progressive related action for a development of a coin/token.

Reducing the supply alone will not guarantee growth of a coin. Swapping/burning are few latest traps, devs have these days to lure naive investors. Never fall for these.

You obviously also think that the fork London, which occurred in Ethereum on August 4, is also a deception? One of the innovations of this fork is the burning of part of the commissions in the Ethereum network. Despite the fact that initially the burning of coins was not provided for in the Ethereum technical document, the team decided to burn some of the coins, which should definitely affect the price increase.

[1714990169]

1714990169

[1714990169]

1714990169

[1714990169]

1714990169

[1714990169]

1714990169

[1714990169]

1714990169

[sapnu]

If we would relate it to the recent burning in Ethereum after the hard fork, I don't think it is something that is legitimate and will make huge progress for the coin in the future. It can be seen easily, although we cannot be certain about it since it just happened days ago. As the supply goes down and the demand rises, the value will surely rise that's why there has been a significant change with Ethereum as the hard fork comes to an end. For other coins, maybe burning is just a false hope but for ETH, I don't think so.

[yhiaali3]

Of course, buying any coin must be before burning and then selling it after burning. Burning the coin periodically leads to an improvement in the price of the coin because it leads to a decrease in the number of the coin and this will lead to a shortage of supply in the market and thus raise the price of the coin, but you must Note that some coins or tokens have a large total supply, so burning sometimes does not have a significant effect until after burning large quantities, so you should first look at the total supply of the coin before buying it.

[bahagia93]

It will be nice to buy before the burning and you can see many of the coins that didn't pump after the burning and after the people know that it is going to increase and having much ability to move forward, then only they buy it. So , it would be better to buy before burning.

The problem is not everyone knows that the coin will be burned except two days before the burning is carried out, the coin party has given the news beforehand and it is true that they will do it, because there are also those who only circulate news about it, but whether it is done or not, everyone does too I don't know because there are also those who say they have been burned but the price is still the same as before it was burned.

[Lexurdania]

Burning is for deceiving and definitely not a progressive related action for a development of a coin/token.

Reducing the supply alone will not guarantee growth of a coin. Swapping/burning are few latest traps, devs have these days to lure naive investors. Never fall for these.

burning that caused nothing actually only fake strategy to drive price up. alot investors didn't understand about it, the real burning in token or coins used in onchain transaction. usually in every transaction made , token will be burned. Dev team usually make it automaticly or calculate in certain periode and take it from total supply. bsc , eth , birb and many other do this mechanism. the most important for new project that offer burning token should focus on product developtment, without it burning only a mirage

[wxa7115]

When u hear/read a coin have a burning plan in their roadmap - is it a always buy in before and sell when it happen? ( Excluded shitcoins).

I was under the impression that only shitcoins did something like burning their supply, after all it is a measure that it is done to artificially raise the price by trying to manipulate one side of the equation of the supply and the demand.

They do not seem to realize that they do not need to do anything remotely like this if they just created some kind of service that people actually wanted to use and they needed their coin for it, so to me this is nothing more but an attempt at manipulating the perception of people and as such you should stay away from such coins.

[irixo10]

When u hear/read a coin have a burning plan in their roadmap - is it a always buy in before and sell when it happen? ( Excluded shitcoins).

The essence of burning a coin or token is to reduce the supply which in turn will make it more profitable but it highly depends on the coin or token in question. Before now, most projects always burn their token and it kind of became a thing  which is used to drive hype, and although it worked for the meantime but later on it doesn't move investors again because even shitcoins are also burning theirs just to pump price. So nowadays,  burning plan doesn't drive price again, it's now seen as a normal project plan, unless it is a coin whose team already have good products and services in place, thus with burning which reduces the supply, it will in turn lead to more value of the project's coin or token.
A good example is the ETH London hard fork, ETH is already a valuable coin, and with the upgrade leading to burning of ETH coin, the price will continue being attractive. Another example is BNB coin, the platform always have a burning plan which was started a long time ago, and it has in a way contributed to the good price of BNB we see today. But you see for most shitcoins, the team only announce burning plan to drive hype, pump the price and possibly dump it on investors.

[dezoel]

I do agree that there is a good chance we may end up with a good price because of the burns, but at the end of the day those that were burned were at already under the ownership of binance so that means it wasn't on the market anyway and it will not increase the price right now. What people do not understand is that, what these burns do is that it drops the supply level, so when there is a huge supply then the price goes down, you are not going to suddenly see a 2x just because they are burned, you are going to see the impact later on when people are buying more than they are selling on average.

This is why I honestly think that burns are good. However I honestly do not know what happens in the future, are they going to burn everything? I mean they have to stop at some point right? Otherwise they would burn everything which I am sure they won't do that.

[Ziskinberg]

When u hear/read a coin have a burning plan in their roadmap - is it a always buy in before and sell when it happen? ( Excluded shitcoins).

Buring some of their tokens helps to increase the value of their project and having a chance to make a buy before it happens was a good opportunity to take but of course, we can't be sure if they were true into their roadmap, that is the problem. In fact, many cases happen that they will never follow their roadmap but rather have to make another because of some reason( which is literally not acceptable).
That is why it was best not to consider this as the basis for buying unless they have announced on their social media the date of the burning process just like BNB.

[inanilujimi]

I choose to buy before the coin is burned. because the hype usually occurs when the altcoin has been burned.
If you buy during the hype, of course you have a big risk of losing.