Really Burn helps Token in positive way?

[jostorres]

it all always comes down to the demand for the price to go up regardless of how much token are burned.
the thing is that so many project are doing this just to attract attention, but they fail miserably, some of them also burning their token decreasing the total supply just because why not, and as a result, the price stays the same even sometime it goes down hill.
these burning are part of strategy that could further helps increase the price of a project but of course it needs demand and being the center of attention first so that investors will notice that this token might be promising, though if the coin or token is pure garbage then many wouldn't care.

I know that in economics there is a law called supply and demand. So both are important for a coin to have a good value. Indeed, so many weak projects are highlighting this burning mechanism feature, and it's getting common already in the eyes of the public so it wasn't appealing anymore. It was still different if the projects has a unique use case. This makes them stand out even if they have a good number of supply.

A good project that has a burning mechanism aren't still exempted from a dump because it's a natural event of the market. The only way for a weak project to get a demand is if they have lots of budget to market their coin and to do some market manipulations.

[The Cryptovator]

The practice of burning for less popular cryptocurrencies, often referred to as "shitcoins," has sparked debates in the cryptocurrency community. Burning involves reducing the circulating supply of a token, theoretically leading to increased scarcity and potentially driving up its value. However, the effectiveness of burning largely depends on the underlying project's reputation and the presence of significant holders.

For a burning strategy to be impactful, the cryptocurrency project should have a solid reputation and a clear value proposition. Without these elements, burning may not have a meaningful impact on the token's price or utility. Additionally, if there are not enough significant holders or users actively participating in the project, the burning process might lack the desired effect.

A pertinent example is the case of Binance Coin (BNB), which has undergone burning events. Some skeptics argue that these burning events haven't resulted in significant price movements or utility enhancements for the token. They believe that burning in such cases could be perceived as more of a marketing tactic to generate hype and attract attention to the project, rather than a genuine mechanism for improving the token's fundamentals.

Ultimately, the effectiveness of burning as a strategy for lesser-known cryptocurrencies depends on various factors, including the project's reputation, the size and activity of its user base, and the overall value proposition it offers. Without a solid foundation and significant community support, burning might indeed be seen as an ineffective and superficial measure to create excitement around a particular token.

[o48o]

Oh, i forgot to add a token that at least to me makes most sense when it comes to burning. And that is UNU SED LEO (aka LEO). It differs from other tokens in a sense that fundamentals of it are centralized by design. Technically it doesn't have a limit on how far it could rise in price, because it's a token from Bitfinex and they are committed to buy it from the market with their exchange profits and burn it. They are very open about it and doing it all the time,

Difference on BNB burning is that binance has commited to burn 50% of the tokens while Bitfinex is going all the way with 100%. Now obviously they can't buy 100% as at some point the price rises so much when people set higher and higher sell orders when everyone who wanted to sell cheap has sold cheap.

Imho that's most positive tokenomics, even though it's based on the activity of centralized exchange.

[Ziskinberg]

in todays world many project sucessfully manipulate noobs player for the hype burned coin which is most of them dont hit circulation, aka non exist. the chain build for this hype
people think decreased total cap, will push price up, this shit show still going till this day and quite effective, the only real burn mechanism is like eth that burned tx fee from transaction, technically they decreased total coin circulation by burning from fee, but as you know they printing via staking. some project burned the coin from fee/tax in transaction which is this the real burning mechanism. please educate yourself about "burning shit show" or you may want burned you holding? . nobody want burned their stash.

LOL it burns independently, Many memecoins do this technique but they don't explain the mechanism in detail. Just burning the supply so it can reduce it.
Many noobs who end up getting caught up in memecoin do underhanded techniques and end up with a scam.
Apart from that, the technique used is not just burning, LOCk liquidity is also a way to attract new investors who don't understand anything about tokenomics and the mechanisms inside.
They don't know that Liquiditas can be drained if the largest token holder (ie the project dev) sells all of their holdings. this is just like Soft Rugpull done by the dev himself.

This is the way to divert the minds of the investors thinking that the price went high after but unfortunately, there is nothing new things happen as the price remains low. That is why I believe that a burning strategy is a fake promise that most of us had become a victim to such words. We realized that it was not the burning mechanism that can change the direction of the project but it was the potentiality and market contribution. Because no matter what the developers do, if it was shitcoin, it remains low value.

[shinratensei_]

in todays world many project sucessfully manipulate noobs player for the hype burned coin which is most of them dont hit circulation, aka non exist. the chain build for this hype
people think decreased total cap, will push price up, this shit show still going till this day and quite effective, the only real burn mechanism is like eth that burned tx fee from transaction, technically they decreased total coin circulation by burning from fee, but as you know they printing via staking. some project burned the coin from fee/tax in transaction which is this the real burning mechanism. please educate yourself about "burning shit show" or you may want burned you holding? . nobody want burned their stash.

LOL it burns independently, Many memecoins do this technique but they don't explain the mechanism in detail. Just burning the supply so it can reduce it.
Many noobs who end up getting caught up in memecoin do underhanded techniques and end up with a scam.
Apart from that, the technique used is not just burning, LOCk liquidity is also a way to attract new investors who don't understand anything about tokenomics and the mechanisms inside.
They don't know that Liquiditas can be drained if the largest token holder (ie the project dev) sells all of their holdings. this is just like Soft Rugpull done by the dev himself.

This is the way to divert the minds of the investors thinking that the price went high after but unfortunately, there is nothing new things happen as the price remains low. That is why I believe that a burning strategy is a fake promise that most of us had become a victim to such words. We realized that it was not the burning mechanism that can change the direction of the project but it was the potentiality and market contribution. Because no matter what the developers do, if it was shitcoin, it remains low value.

well good thing nowadays not that many people are actually getting tricked by such trickery, majority of meme coin nowadays even if they tried to speak about it in their twitter about burning no one gives a damn really.
many already figured out that its just gimmick to attract attention and nothing more thats why even after the burning the coin just stuck.
the thing about these coin burning in general is that sometimes they are not so significant only burning some portion of coin, moreover when the devs could literally unlock some coins that might inflates the total circulating supply making the burning was rather kind of pointless, will instead make it looks like dumb af.

[serjent05]

Hi,
Some How this Burn Buzz word stuck in my mind and i didn't see practical results so far in any successful token.

For example, Shiba Inu is burning tokens aggressively and is it really helping them?

May be i am noob here and happy to hear from experts!

I believe this topic will be useful for someone too!

Burning is one way of reducing the supply of the token.  So in the essence of supply and demand, burning is an artificial way of reducing the supply making the sell pressure to be eaten out while the demand pressure is increasing.

This also shows that the developer believes that the token in circulation is too much so there is this need for them to intervene and cut the existing supply.  I think rather then burning the token supply, the dev should work their ass out in creating use case for the token.  It will also give a better result if aside from burning tokens, the developer are creating partnership to different company and individual in utilizing the use case of the token.  After all, adoption pushes through when there is a need for an individual to have the tokens in their wallet.

[avp2306]

It was before as I witness huge changes in its price but for now, it somewhat looks different. That is why I don't want to believe such words saying that it helps to a price increase because what I see is that it doesn't matter much many is the total supply, as long as it was a legit project, it gradually grows from time to time. In fact, so many projects have a huge market cap but still, they are able to pump during the bull season which means that they really have the potential despite it's number.

Sometimes this is just a counter measure done by a dying project so that they can revive it back and maybe try to gain the attention of their old investor then convince them that there's something good to happen on their project and use that bull season as their main tool to hype the people following their project. Hard to find legit project nowadays and maybe for now its good to buy and trade any of those new crypto while they are in bullish condition since its hard to get stress when price drop came or it became a total scam.

Or better yet, this is the strategy of those projects who want to attract naive buyers.
Saying they are burning, to reduce its supply and so it will possibly contribute to its price increase.
However, we should take note that the increase may not only come from the decreasing supply.
But in most cases, it is how the team is progressing with their actual developments on the project.
Without visible movement on the platform, hard to expect a gradual increase on its price in the market.
Burning some of their supply will only help if they will also do some action on their coin itself.

That it is since some dumb buyers will think about that the pump will come next after the burning of tokens happen. They didn't know that this is just a band aid solution by devs so that they can attract new buyers to acquire there tokens.

Investors should see if there's relevance regarding on the devs action do since if they see that the volume is almost nothing and they do that activity then provably they are just fishing another investors and scam them. Maybe a buy back option with huge money used is good action since from this there's a chance that pump might happen.

[bangjoe]

Hi,
Some How this Burn Buzz word stuck in my mind and i didn't see practical results so far in any successful token.

For example, Shiba Inu is burning tokens aggressively and is it really helping them?

May be i am noob here and happy to hear from experts!

I believe this topic will be useful for someone too!

Burning is one way of reducing the supply of the token.  So in the essence of supply and demand, burning is an artificial way of reducing the supply making the sell pressure to be eaten out while the demand pressure is increasing.

This also shows that the developer believes that the token in circulation is too much so there is this need for them to intervene and cut the existing supply.  I think rather then burning the token supply, the dev should work their ass out in creating use case for the token.  It will also give a better result if aside from burning tokens, the developer are creating partnership to different company and individual in utilizing the use case of the token.  After all, adoption pushes through when there is a need for an individual to have the tokens in their wallet.

Yes, in terms of reducing the supply tokens that are circulating and pressing to encourage price movements, this is effective if the burned tokens have a large amount of the total supply made.
Of course, if you only rely on burning tokens, this will not have a significant affecting demand movement, because the demand is based on the use case on the token itself, which makes a reason for people to buy tokens for their needs in accessing the ecosystem offered in the project, but if it is only limited burning without an increase in utility in the token will make a temporary increase, because the use case of a limited token will make the token left, it may have to talk realistically in terms of the project long -term because if only relying on the burning of the token to suppress the movement it will be useless for the future, they can lose money.

[KingsDen]

Burning works on the premise that there is actual demand. It's probably not working for a lot of projects because they also have to create or manipulate the demand for the token. They often advertise aggressively by creating hype all over social media and offering new features that may or may not be useful at all. Methods like that are only good for short term.

Burns have two effects.

• The fastest effect is on projects that are already on the hype. I mean trending projects that are always in the hot coins of every exchange. When such a project is already make a wave, the news of coin burn will surely create more demand because it is believed to trigger limited supply
• Another effect is in the case mentioned by Op. Shiba is no longer trending and no matter how much coins the developers burn, it can only make little/no difference until the bull run approaches. The burning will give holders of the coin the conviction to keep holding and potential buyers the will to buy against the bull run.

[leonair]

If a coin is popular in the market and has a good value and a lot of investors for it, then it is natural that if the token is burned, the value of the token will increase a lot. Because burning will decrease the total supply of the coin and its demand will be high due to which the value of that coin will increase a lot.  But if you are talking about a new coin for which there are no investors, even if that coin is 99% burned, the price of that coin will not increase because there are no investors for it. Burn issue will only work in a positive way when that coin is already popular but I don't think burn issue will do any good for new and shit coins.

[Vaskiy]

If a coin is popular in the market and has a good value and a lot of investors for it, then it is natural that if the token is burned, the value of the token will increase a lot. Because burning will decrease the total supply of the coin and its demand will be high due to which the value of that coin will increase a lot.  But if you are talking about a new coin for which there are no investors, even if that coin is 99% burned, the price of that coin will not increase because there are no investors for it. Burn issue will only work in a positive way when that coin is already popular but I don't think burn issue will do any good for new and shit coins.

Agreed, we were able to see this with Shiba Inu. When the token reached the market the supply was huge and the memecoins unexpected growth made more people interested on it. Further the development is made better and even the more real time usage is provided with acceptance in stores and day to day stores. There is huge fluctuations and to stabilize the market, continuous burning process is involved. If that hadn't done, now price could've gone to the bottom from where it bounced.

[wheelz1200]

Hi,
Some How this Burn Buzz word stuck in my mind and i didn't see practical results so far in any successful token.

For example, Shiba Inu is burning tokens aggressively and is it really helping them?

May be i am noob here and happy to hear from experts!

I believe this topic will be useful for someone too!

Honestly it's a gimmick to cloud the real price and provides little to nothing to the project itself.  If projects are promoting it instead of what they are actually doing than it should be a red flag for anyone.  It's a smoke and mirrors game, stops people from asking what they are really doing with the project.

[Yatsan]

Burning mechanism or utility of a token is good for the tokenomics of a project. As we all know and as cited by other users, it is meant to lessen the supply amd for demand to increase. However, not because a platform has a burning mechanism,  success will be guaranteed already. A burning mechanism would work well if there would be a continuous demand with a particular token. I saw this with one of the famous play to earn game last year. They managed to create a burning mech for that game but it seemed to be too late to still gather the interest of their players therefore timing is crutial for the team behind a project. Eveything's too much wouldn't result to a good one and if things won't be managedbeveryrike jansss

[AakZaki]

Honestly it's a gimmick to cloud the real price and provides little to nothing to the project itself.  If projects are promoting it instead of what they are actually doing than it should be a red flag for anyone.  It's a smoke and mirrors game, stops people from asking what they are really doing with the project.

The rug will come when everyone believes in what is called Burn Token. Even though that doesn't guarantee that the token can be trusted. Many scammers engage in this kind of practice in anticipation of new users asking how the project is progressing. Don't believe in new tokens that don't have a strong community, let alone promotions that you can't rely on. it's better to choose a token that is old and currently bearish, that's better.

[kawetsriyanto]

Honestly it's a gimmick to cloud the real price and provides little to nothing to the project itself.  If projects are promoting it instead of what they are actually doing than it should be a red flag for anyone.  It's a smoke and mirrors game, stops people from asking what they are really doing with the project.

Indeed. If the project only focuses on the burning program without developing the project itself, burning won't impact anything. When there is no demand on the market, lowering the number of the tokens will be nothing. But if the project grows constantly and they also have a good trading volume on the market, burning program will be helpful. So, it actually depends on the quality of the project and how the demand on the market.

The rug will come when everyone believes in what is called Burn Token. Even though that doesn't guarantee that the token can be trusted.

Burning never guarantees the quality of the project. It is only the way to lower the number of total supply of the tokens. To know the quality of the project, we need to analyze many things on the project. Check the quality of the developers, how strong the community, how the market caps & daily trading volume, and check the partnerships are some of parts of the project what we need to analyze carefully.

[JeffBrad12]

Honestly it's a gimmick to cloud the real price and provides little to nothing to the project itself.  If projects are promoting it instead of what they are actually doing than it should be a red flag for anyone.  It's a smoke and mirrors game, stops people from asking what they are really doing with the project.

The rug will come when everyone believes in what is called Burn Token. Even though that doesn't guarantee that the token can be trusted. Many scammers engage in this kind of practice in anticipation of new users asking how the project is progressing. Don't believe in new tokens that don't have a strong community, let alone promotions that you can't rely on. it's better to choose a token that is old and currently bearish, that's better.

despite the fact that those scammers are generally using this burning of token for somekind of marketing stunt, its good thing to know that majority didn't really fall into this trickery.
even though there are many shitcoins that created some kind of burning event but majority just don't care, they don't give a damn in regard of the coin thats trying reducing their supply through the means of burning.
instead, these coins are slowly heading towards their certain delisting in the future.
its just how it is with crypto space nowadays, even burning token thats supposed to be used for retaining the value is used for marketing stunt.

[RewFrew]

Hi,
Some How this Burn Buzz word stuck in my mind and i didn't see practical results so far in any successful token.

For example, Shiba Inu is burning tokens aggressively and is it really helping them?

May be i am noob here and happy to hear from experts!

I believe this topic will be useful for someone too!

Yes it is useful topic and it will be very helpful for newbies. I think token burn is big news for a coin/token. When they burn token then creat positive hype for that token in market and many investor want to invest on that token.Token burn event when occur then then token crisis creat so then price increase. We know every products price depend on demand and supply, So when supply were decrease then demand increase and price were high. Roughly we can tell burning creat positive impact and a attract buyers. So i can tell Really Burn helps Token in positive way there has no doubt.

[@sriyan]

Hi,
Some How this Burn Buzz word stuck in my mind and i didn't see practical results so far in any successful token.

For example, Shiba Inu is burning tokens aggressively and is it really helping them?

May be i am noob here and happy to hear from experts!

I believe this topic will be useful for someone too!

If the token supply is burning, that means the total supply will be reduced. It will increase the value of the token. Also, price value depends on the news of the crypto market and the utility of the token.

[coinerer]

Hi,
Some How this Burn Buzz word stuck in my mind and i didn't see practical results so far in any successful token.

For example, Shiba Inu is burning tokens aggressively and is it really helping them?

May be i am noob here and happy to hear from experts!

I believe this topic will be useful for someone too!

If the token supply is burning, that means the total supply will be reduced. It will increase the value of the token. Also, price value depends on the news of the crypto market and the utility of the token.

Yes, it is natural that when the quantity of something decreases and the demand is high, the price of that item goes up.  If you look at Bitcoin for example, the  of Bitcoin is demand several times greater than the supply .  And this is why the value of Bitcoin is huge. and we care about Bitcoin that much. So token burn can help increase the price of that token, it is not impossible and it is a very effective strategy to increase the value of any token in the market.

[Blitzboy]

Burning mechanism or utility of a token is good for the tokenomics of a project. As we all know and as cited by other users, it is meant to lessen the supply amd for demand to increase. However, not because a platform has a burning mechanism,  success will be guaranteed already. A burning mechanism would work well if there would be a continuous demand with a particular token. I saw this with one of the famous play to earn game last year. They managed to create a burning mech for that game but it seemed to be too late to still gather the interest of their players therefore timing is crutial for the team behind a project. Eveything's too much wouldn't result to a good one and if things won't be managedbeveryrike jansss

Its crucial to use it whether demand is strong or low, or perhaps somewhere in between, as was the case with the infamous play-to-earn game from the previous year, which, depending on your perspective, either didnt work or may have worked to some extent.

Everything in moderation, even too much or too little, appears to be a wise course of action, at least in some situations. Unless it is, it wont be good if there is too much or too enough. As a result, timing might be critical or inconsequential, and the project team must understand precisely when to use this method and when to avoid it. Therefore, the timing must be appropriate, albeit it need not necessarily be.