A good project will think about it in detail to make people think more about what they are going to do.
Yeah a good people always gives regular update and care about their users. Shit project just create burning & some others hype, pump and then downfall. That's the reason, we see meme coins fly as a while then no news about those after hype end 
Topic: Why is burning coins good - page 4. (Read 1121 times)
Its probably after seeing bnb burning strategy, now almost each and every project doing this common practice without knowing what they are doing but try to follow bnb'r footsteps.
Burning or swapping coins were common ways and had been done before so that team could conduct their project perfectly. But right now so many projects have announced they'll burn their token! Some of those project may have proper reason but most of those have no need but want to make highlighting their project! Even some project don't burn their coins after announcement but pump their coin by using such hype strategy.
for now it seems that burning coins is one of the routines of a coin that is most commonly done by almost all developers who do the projects they run.and things like this now seem to have been misused by some bad people to cheat with the lure of burning coins then everything will be good even though it's just a trick to get people into the trap.
a lot of meme coin or shitcoin implement this now.
and from here we have to be able to sort out a project even though they do the same thing but their intentions are different
In every single new project first of all investors will focus for the token supply if It seems small cap coins when they will expected good price when it live on the exchanges, I think it’s a common perception. After burning some projects will increase but not at all. Even a lot of big projects burning token to increase significant growth. Though price isn’t control by team but they just try to increase the price in this way.
Burning or swapping coins were common ways and had been done before so that team could conduct their project perfectly. But right now so many projects have announced they'll burn their token! Some of those project may have proper reason but most of those have no need but want to make highlighting their project! Even some project don't burn their coins after announcement but pump their coin by using such hype strategy.
Burning Coin mean reduced some % amount from.his supply. Which mean its supply become decreasing which is really for any project because by doing this the price of his project must be pump because we know that when demand is huge and supply is small the price will be bullish and when burning of any coin done his supply has reduced while demand become increase so that the reason that burning coin is good for any project
That's how it should be.But, do you know that not all projects that do the burning of their supply aren't pumping in prices? There are many of them that are not seeing the effect as expected.
It is why many investors are not also falling for the burning for uncommon projects.
When supply decreases out but the demand is still there then you would really be expecting those climbing of prices but not an assurance
because it will also vary of the said burning event whether its really that interesting or not because not all investors would really be ending
up on having positive approach.
A project that token burns yet there's not that much attention from the investors, they won't succeed even if they keep on burning.
Investors who are being wise won't just bite to those marketing and events about burning of their tokens.
Burning Coin mean reduced some % amount from.his supply. Which mean its supply become decreasing which is really for any project because by doing this the price of his project must be pump because we know that when demand is huge and supply is small the price will be bullish and when burning of any coin done his supply has reduced while demand become increase so that the reason that burning coin is good for any project
That's how it should be.But, do you know that not all projects that do the burning of their supply aren't pumping in prices? There are many of them that are not seeing the effect as expected.
It is why many investors are not also falling for the burning for uncommon projects.
Well explained @hazak 
but what I don't understand is why projects have a very large pool of coins in the first place...Do the devs overvalue these projects & expect to sell all these coins and also get the green light to go with inflated numbers of tokens 
.Its only when the sale doesn't go as planned do they resort to balance the figures, because the issued tokens compared to the unissued is way below their target and burning some allows for value addition to existing coins and also stimulates demand around the crypto users.
Might over calculated or they think that more tokens give them more demand and profit. They likely underestimate the market competition as they expect too much for their project. but what I don't understand is why projects have a very large pool of coins in the first place...Do the devs overvalue these projects & expect to sell all these coins and also get the green light to go with inflated numbers of tokens .Its only when the sale doesn't go as planned do they resort to balance the figures, because the issued tokens compared to the unissued is way below their target and burning some allows for value addition to existing coins and also stimulates demand around the crypto users.Now, burning tokens have made sense as it become a strategy to make their price moves up. It becomes a common practice for those who have a huge market cap. Eventually, it works but I don't know if this is a sustainable strategy or not? maybe they look into some projects who did this first and it works but can't be sure if this works to worthless projects.
Well explained @hazak but what I don't understand is why projects have a very large pool of coins in the first place...Do the devs overvalue these projects & expect to sell all these coins and also get the green light to go with inflated numbers of tokens .Its only when the sale doesn't go as planned do they resort to balance the figures, because the issued tokens compared to the unissued is way below their target and burning some allows for value addition to existing coins and also stimulates demand around the crypto users.
but what I don't understand is why projects have a very large pool of coins in the first place...Do the devs overvalue these projects & expect to sell all these coins and also get the green light to go with inflated numbers of tokens .Its only when the sale doesn't go as planned do they resort to balance the figures, because the issued tokens compared to the unissued is way below their target and burning some allows for value addition to existing coins and also stimulates demand around the crypto users. Burning Coin mean reduced some % amount from.his supply. Which mean its supply become decreasing which is really for any project because by doing this the price of his project must be pump because we know that when demand is huge and supply is small the price will be bullish and when burning of any coin done his supply has reduced while demand become increase so that the reason that burning coin is good for any project
That's how it should be.But, do you know that not all projects that do the burning of their supply aren't pumping in prices? There are many of them that are not seeing the effect as expected.
It is why many investors are not also falling for the burning for uncommon projects.
When supply decreases out but the demand is still there then you would really be expecting those climbing of prices but not an assurance
because it will also vary of the said burning event whether its really that interesting or not because not all investors would really be ending
up on having positive approach.
Burning Coin mean reduced some % amount from.his supply. Which mean its supply become decreasing which is really for any project because by doing this the price of his project must be pump because we know that when demand is huge and supply is small the price will be bullish and when burning of any coin done his supply has reduced while demand become increase so that the reason that burning coin is good for any project
That's how it should be.But, do you know that not all projects that do the burning of their supply aren't pumping in prices? There are many of them that are not seeing the effect as expected.
It is why many investors are not also falling for the burning for uncommon projects.
Burning coin is smart business strategy from developer how to make their coin could be interested, but not all burning can make coin pump depend how serious developer keep lock coin, some time have developer make burning coin but other side he sold much supply coin and make price keep dump. I most appreciated with many burning coin is success like Trustwallet coin burn more than 90% and make price pump from 0.06$ become 1$ right now.
In fact, the coin burning system is a very good thing and is quite feasible to do to make investors interested in coins that will indeed be burned because this can indirectly be profitable.but for now the coin burning system has become something commonplace and it seems that almost all altcoins that really can't compete and that includes memecoin always use things like this to attract fans.
actually it would be great if coin burning was done but on the other hand with things like memecoin and shitcoin doing things like this indirectly made coin burning not special anymore
Burning Coin mean reduced some % amount from.his supply. Which mean its supply become decreasing which is really for any project because by doing this the price of his project must be pump because we know that when demand is huge and supply is small the price will be bullish and when burning of any coin done his supply has reduced while demand become increase so that the reason that burning coin is good for any project
The primary objective of coin burn is to regulate the supply and thereby stabilize the price, additionally, by reducing the circulating supply of a portion of the circulation so the number of transactions gets equally reduced. In a nutshell, a reduction in volume lowers the chances of spam attack which leaves enough bandwidth for health transaction count on the network.
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?
The thing is that I don’t get why all these projects will start a huge amount of coins, knowing very well that they would end up burning almost half of the coins later. What’s the need for all that? Isn’t it all an unnecessary process? Since they know that they are going to end burning almost half of the coins later on, it would be best that they just start up with a smaller or the exact amount that they would prefer, than starting with a huge amount and then burning them later on.I just don’t see the need for all that. This is not something that I would see frequently before, but now it has become a trend that almost every new project now wants to follow the trend.
burning, I think, does not play a special role to a project that is not successful and not promising, there are many projects with a huge number of coins in circulation, which have trading volumes of billions of dollars per day, such as shiba inu, doge.
The burn of coins is fair truly great in the event that the supply is boundless and the stamping of unused coins is continous or basically having that unbounded supply or might we say that coins does have billions of add up to supply at that point it is fair great to have this kind of burning strategy but doesnt naturally implies that cost would be going up. It all things with the request since there wouldnt be still no esteem of a coin on which request isnt truly there compared into those who do have big total supply but the request is tall at that point anticipate that the esteem would truly be great.
I still remember the time where the word "burning" was being used by these new projects (mostly memecoins and shitcoins) just to attract investors.
They will try to create a coin which has a very huge supply (mostly in trillions) and then every transaction, they will burn a certain percentage of the total supply. Most of them didn't state when the burning ends so most likely, those projects will end up at 0 supply because burning is limitless which is kinda funny.
Well, its not about the burning mechanism of the coin. It depends on the usage of the coin. I remember BNB where they are making quarterly burning of BNB coin until the supply comes down to 100 million coins only. This is a good thing for BNB since it increases the supply of it and aside from that, they have a very huge users in their exchanges which makes them very popular unlike those new projects that are just attaching the word "burn" just to gain clout.
Burning affects the price of coins only if there are many holders of it. Its kinda useless if a new project will have a burn mechanism and then there are only few people that are using that coin.
They will try to create a coin which has a very huge supply (mostly in trillions) and then every transaction, they will burn a certain percentage of the total supply. Most of them didn't state when the burning ends so most likely, those projects will end up at 0 supply because burning is limitless which is kinda funny.
Well, its not about the burning mechanism of the coin. It depends on the usage of the coin. I remember BNB where they are making quarterly burning of BNB coin until the supply comes down to 100 million coins only. This is a good thing for BNB since it increases the supply of it and aside from that, they have a very huge users in their exchanges which makes them very popular unlike those new projects that are just attaching the word "burn" just to gain clout.
Burning affects the price of coins only if there are many holders of it. Its kinda useless if a new project will have a burn mechanism and then there are only few people that are using that coin.
What do you think about burning coins? Does this really affect the market value of the coins?
For a coin, investors and holders's mind is important. If burn coin made them believe a coin will be increased, and then it is something good. Because if people believe less supply means more demands, they wouldn't want to miss the chance and then buy the tokens too. It can cause pump for a coin. But people really should know this because i read from social media that there are people who think to "burn" coin that they bought, and don't know if they gonna lose the coin. Only developers who must burn their tokens and not us investors or holders.
This comes as a surprise to me, I wasn't aware that there are projects that burn crypto coins on purpose. This is a bit crazy, because supply shortage will drive the price upwards but usually not if it's artificially created. How do we really know that the coins are not accessible anymore? Maybe they just wait for higher prices to dumb their coins. A limitation in the total amount of a crypto coin is a good thing, like we are seeing with bitcoins. But if the creators of a projected wanted such supply limits, why wasn't the coin created in such a way. Maybe I am to critical, but I would very cautious to buy more coins if the are being burnt.
Burning is proof that the team wants to increase prices instantly, if waiting for buyers is difficult then the popular way right now is to burn, but we have to be careful because many projects can also increase stock so that burning looks useless.
Jump to: