Topic: token supply - page 6. (Read 790 times)
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.
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.
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
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. 
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.
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, ...?
Jump to: