Why is burning coins good

[Coin BTC]

but if they can't recruit new investors who will pump up the price of coins

What the fuck why recruit why not just tell them to join, looks better than recruits , lmao ..
Schemes such as pump likely to intensify because they are unregulated. The portion of the coins that is being burnt can be verified on the blockchain. These coins are sent to a wallet to which no one has access.

[bakasabo]

I dont get the whole idea behind burning tokens. Some projects issue billions or trillions of tokens and announce they have burned several millions after some time. Not a big achievement imo. Or the token is very, very cheap and they burb a great part of supply. That does not change a lot. What was cheap, stays cheap. Some projects put too much attention on burbing. Like it is a miracle. But in general burb barely affecte the price.

[Swapzone_pr]

Crypto creators burn the coins in an attempt to increase the value of the coins that remain in circulation. It is not very dissimilar to what happens in the realm of Oil. If the price of a barrel of crude oil drops because there is a glut in the supply and the demand is not commensurately high, then the oil-producing nations reduce the supply so the prices go back up again. The same dynamic of supply and demand is at play behind the process of coin burning.

[rugrats]

Recently, many projects have announced the burning of coins, but not everyone understands what this means.

This is a process by which cryptocurrency miners or developers get rid of a certain amount of tokens by sending them to addresses that are not accessible to anyone. The burning of coins is being implemented not because of the low viability of the project, but rather because of the desire of the creators of cryptocurrencies for great prospects.

Thus, the developers are trying to reduce the total number of available coins, while the created shortage affects the growth of their value.

The burning of coins can talk about the upcoming expansion of the project and a possible increase in its value. For example, after the recent announcement of a collaboration between Polygon and Newscrypto, the latter announced that they decided to burn $ 10M worth of NWC tokens this year. Consequently, in the near future, we can see a significant growth of NWC price on this news. What do you think about burning coins? Does this really affect the market value of the coins?

I see current projects with a value they offer of 1 trillion will burn 50% after selling 50% and they will burn that 50% when they sell the coins they sell first. looks like this is some form of inflated value that will be inflated to hit some investors. Because they always think that if there is a plan to burn those coins in the future, the coin price will definitely increase significantly. This approach is also one of the marketing tactics of the project that makes investors happy because every time the coin disappears from circulation, the value increases, this is the way of many works and projects. this doesn't surprise me because these are the ways many projects are using these days.

[fadil46]

If that's the case I agree, there's no need to keep burning coins, if interest in coins actually increases for some people who like to invest, but the drawback is that if the coins are not burned, the increase will be hampered, but I don't know what factors influence it, especially if the demand for coins is increasing, then what is the function of the burning?

Generally, the burning of coins is only to reduce the supply, regardless of whether the price will go up or down because it has nothing to do with anything although the effect can be very clear, namely to a better price when the coin continues to be hunted by everyone in the market.

[airdata]

The main purposes of burning of coin/token is to make sure that its current market price is stable and sustainable. In this way as well it can create a good pumping event of that certain token/coin that is being burned.

When project's team decide that they want to increase market value of their token, then they start burning system. But only burning is not effective for increasing price, need active community and hard working team management.     

[Abiky]

It is actually a good thing to burn tokens.

But a lot of projects have found it as a marketing ploy just to hype their projects. Unlike those projects that have burning part of their road map, they don't have to play it as a marketing.

Since it's part of their road map, people have been aware that there's always a schedule for such projects to burn tokens as part of their token economy.

Exactly. This is nothing more than a marketing scheme by developers to attract investors into their project. It's not about burning tokens, but rather about providing real use cases for the mainstream world. One thing I'd like to mention is that burning tokens doesn't guarantee it's going to become much more valuable in the long run. That depends whenever the supply of the token in question is in fact limited, or not. Added scarcity is what guarantee's a cryptocurrency or token's value on the market. The more coins there are in circulation, the less valuable it'll be.

Coins like BNB, and now ETH, are burning their supply in order to become scarcer over time. This is a good thing because it increases demand for these crypto assets at a fast pace. But not every coin that burns its supply will turn out to be successful in the long run. It's all a matter of providing utility to people in the mainstream world. As long as projects are able to accomplish that, they'll last for a very long time. Just my thoughts

[Sir Legend]

Burning coins is the best way to reduce the amount of stock that is too much, of course this will make the price skyrocket, now many projects make a lot of tokens and if they don't sell then the rest of the coins will be burned so as to convince investors so that there is no dump that makes the coin die or frozen exchanges.

[GaxviiBuss]

Based on my little experience and project that have I earn their coin, burning coin from my perspective, increase the value of the coin, Practical I own like two coin that do engage in burning, when ever the project announced burning the value goes beyond moon, I.e aiming mars. So burning coin increase the value of the coin.

[Questat]

I dont get the whole idea behind burning tokens. Some projects issue billions or trillions of tokens and announce they have burned several millions after some time. Not a big achievement imo. Or the token is very, very cheap and they burb a great part of supply. That does not change a lot. What was cheap, stays cheap. Some projects put too much attention on burbing. Like it is a miracle. But in general burb barely affecte the price.

We have that same thought before, I really don't think that was helpful to the project but now, it seems a way to boost their price and that it looks beneficial to everyone. This process has been known now, many projects have a huge market cap trying to uplift their price and they do the burning of thousands of tokens, in fact, the known Binance Coin had been doing this twice(if I'm not mistaken).
It is very common practice this time but if the project itself doesn't have any use-cased, that I think still useless.

[MariaWang]

Tokenomics is a very complicated and experimental issue. Burning could be kind of an artificial way to correct some trend, a marketing trick, etc.

I don't like the burning, it's not elegant, but I can't say that is bad, it depends on the case.

Cheers

[ameliana]

By burning tokens, projects can attract investors to enter the project because hype burn tokens are usually very much in demand so they can get large volumes with little circulation because tokens are burned with the hope that the price will be good in the future, but if the project is announced there will be token burn early, so it's best to consider holding that tokens.

[wxa7115]

Not all coin burning is good.  Burning means taking some coins out of circulation and sending them to another address which no one has access to. As a result, coins are declining in circulation and prices are rising to increase demand. Many new coins try to take advantage of this. Burning some good old coin is good.

But that is the thing, by burning coins the developers are reducing the supply but this has no effect on the demand, now some may expect that the reduction in the supply could be enough to make the price of the coin to go up as the demand remains the same, but we must understand that things are not so straightforward.

If the amount of coins in an exchange does not change and the demand does not change either even if half of the supply is burned then the price of the coin will remain the same, so this shows that many times when developers announce something like this they are trying to create hype and the expectation the price will go up, so to me it is just another way to try to manipulate the market to their advantage.

[SquallLeonhart]

Not all coin burning is good.  Burning means taking some coins out of circulation and sending them to another address which no one has access to. As a result, coins are declining in circulation and prices are rising to increase demand. Many new coins try to take advantage of this. Burning some good old coin is good.

But that is the thing, by burning coins the developers are reducing the supply but this has no effect on the demand, now some may expect that the reduction in the supply could be enough to make the price of the coin to go up as the demand remains the same, but we must understand that things are not so straightforward.

If the amount of coins in an exchange does not change and the demand does not change either even if half of the supply is burned then the price of the coin will remain the same, so this shows that many times when developers announce something like this they are trying to create hype and the expectation the price will go up, so to me it is just another way to try to manipulate the market to their advantage.

Supply/demand mechanism says that if the supply gets shorted, then the demand could stay the same and have no absolutely change at all in the long run as well.

I personally believe that if it was done in any other way then it could have been fine. However the problem with the burning tokens is the fact that the burning is not done to the tokens that we see on the market anyway, which means that it is not something that is a "supply" for us, sure it changes the number on the data pages but the reality is that what do we even get rid of?

Tokens at the hands of the project owners, that money wasn't there to be bought by anyone anyway. Like BNB that binance burns, was that on the market? Was it traded? It wasn't, it was already in their treasury waiting to get burned. So normally if you make the supply lower, then demand doesn't need to change, but here they don't lower the supply at all.

[NelfiNovita]

Many people say that burning coins is good because the total supply of coins will decrease so that the coins are not widely circulated in various exchanges, on the other hand the demand or buyers of these coins increases so that there is a shortage of coins and causes the price of these coins to be very expensive.

[RiskySanchez]

Burning coins is a classic way, developers always doing that for marketing plans, which is nothing but to increase the hype of investors and think this is an opportunity to increase the value of the coin on the exchange market by considering max supply and supply circulation. is this good? I believe for long term yes, but for short term it's just a temporary pump because of the hype during the event

[Cornia]

Burning coins is good for old top coins. This reduces the total supply of tokens and increases the price.  But burning a new coin is not very effective. Because they have huge total supply. As a result, burning a few coins can have no effect on the total supply and price.

[wxa7115]

Not all coin burning is good.  Burning means taking some coins out of circulation and sending them to another address which no one has access to. As a result, coins are declining in circulation and prices are rising to increase demand. Many new coins try to take advantage of this. Burning some good old coin is good.

But that is the thing, by burning coins the developers are reducing the supply but this has no effect on the demand, now some may expect that the reduction in the supply could be enough to make the price of the coin to go up as the demand remains the same, but we must understand that things are not so straightforward.

If the amount of coins in an exchange does not change and the demand does not change either even if half of the supply is burned then the price of the coin will remain the same, so this shows that many times when developers announce something like this they are trying to create hype and the expectation the price will go up, so to me it is just another way to try to manipulate the market to their advantage.

Supply/demand mechanism says that if the supply gets shorted, then the demand could stay the same and have no absolutely change at all in the long run as well.

I personally believe that if it was done in any other way then it could have been fine. However the problem with the burning tokens is the fact that the burning is not done to the tokens that we see on the market anyway, which means that it is not something that is a "supply" for us, sure it changes the number on the data pages but the reality is that what do we even get rid of?

Tokens at the hands of the project owners, that money wasn't there to be bought by anyone anyway. Like BNB that binance burns, was that on the market? Was it traded? It wasn't, it was already in their treasury waiting to get burned. So normally if you make the supply lower, then demand doesn't need to change, but here they don't lower the supply at all.

This is exactly my point, the developers could burn out 90% of the supply and the price could remain unaffected as those were coins that were not being traded anyway and were not part of the supply on the exchanges being bought and sold.

The only way for this to produce an increase in the price is if people see this as a positive news and then begin to buy more of the coin with the hopes it goes up in value, and as the demand increases and the supply at the exchanges remains the same then an increase in the price happens, mostly because of hype of course.

[nimogsm]

Yes, I would not say that only recently, it was from the very beginning of smart contracts.The same binance burns tokens on a quarterly basis and everyone is used to it.This is good in all aspects, since the emission is reduced and in the future there may be a shortage,and this is only for a hand to everyone who invests for a long period.

[perfect999]

Burning coins is good for old top coins. This reduces the total supply of tokens and increases the price.  But burning a new coin is not very effective. Because they have huge total supply. As a result, burning a few coins can have no effect on the total supply and price.

Even burning is good for many projects but still we have to understand all this is also creating some hype which is not good because peoples not understanding this all and investing in hype which still not beneficial for them. Burning could be helpful in only better use case of projects because if your use case is still not good then surely this burning is also not going to have any impact on this project, it is just because of shilling and having some short term benefit which is never been good idea.

As we already have some good examples from different members, burning could be useful in only case you are doing this all by demand and supply but if you already have some very big supply then this burning could be helpful until you reach on your better demand.