Topic: Why is burning coins good - page 7. (Read 1159 times)
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.
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
I don't like the burning, it's not elegant, but I can't say that is bad, it depends on the case.
Cheers
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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. 
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. 
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. 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?
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. 
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.
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.
I don't understand why projects refer to these methods in order to achieve stability or increase the value of their tokens/coins. In the first place, if the project is viable, the coin/token will not suffer any potential loss of value due to its supply. Hence the need for burning would not be there since the coin is doing well for itself. This method is so overused in the current altcoin market that people think that by purposely removing coins in circulation, the coin's value should rise. On paper and in theory, that should happen, but what if the coin doesn't really offer something new on the table?
I see that burning coins is just an effort to attract the public's attention so that they are interested in investing in these coins. although there is no guarantee that the coin will be successful or anything but in my opinion it is only for a marketing strategy and in the future it will not have any effect 
this is more rational than burning when the coin is not developing, although burning is considered important for the development of coins in the future, the coin burning process is based on a study or analysis of the pre-sale circulation, usually they do it when the ICO has been completed and delete unsold coins, or as you say using the burning process every three months after going through the existing mechanism.
Regardless of that and what you said, each team will also see how the interest in their coins is every year, because if the demand continues to grow, then the coin burning will also not be carried out immediately even though it has been set in the plan in order to maintain the basic value of their coins. 
There are several ways in the process of burning coins, the ways are varied and determined. Some developers, will use one step burning after the ICO is over to remove unsold coins from circulation.
Then, there are also those who prefer to do it in several stages. Just like binance which does the coin burning process every three months, this burning is part of a commitment to reach 100 million BNB which will later be burned.
this is more rational than burning when the coin is not developing, although burning is considered important for the development of coins in the future, the coin burning process is based on a study or analysis of the pre-sale circulation, usually they do it when the ICO has been completed and delete unsold coins, or as you say using the burning process every three months after going through the existing mechanism. Then, there are also those who prefer to do it in several stages. Just like binance which does the coin burning process every three months, this burning is part of a commitment to reach 100 million BNB which will later be burned.
Burning is a good way to get more attention from investors nowadays, because its like a big event wherein there's always a good improvement afterwards. So its not surprising some developers trying to do the same way when they noticed that the project didn't improve more or there are some factors that trying to make their project stagnant. It's always the best way for them which is very effective.
That is, the current burning is more of a diversion to investors, because after the burning there will be good improvements afterwards, whether the construction of this kind of project can be successful on a general scale, considering that many projects that are present are also doing the same thing, and maybe they have other ways to make the project look effective, it doesn't just depend on the burning session, I think if you stick to one point, then everything else will be ignored.
Burning is a good way to get more attention from investors nowadays, because its like a big event wherein there's always a good improvement afterwards. So its not surprising some developers trying to do the same way when they noticed that the project didn't improve more or there are some factors that trying to make their project stagnant. It's always the best way for them which is very effective.
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?
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?
Burning tokens or coins aims to reduce the circulation of tokens on the exchange, so that price increases can be done easily, but if they can't recruit new investors who will pump up the price of coins, then burning coins has no effect on the price, in which case it would be nice if they stake. Staking can reduce the circulation of tokens on the exchange, and profits are also earned by token holders, the total supply is fixed.
Recently, many projects have announced the burning of coins, but not everyone understands what this means.
There are several ways in the process of burning coins, the ways are varied and determined. Some developers, will use one step burning after the ICO is over to burn unsold coins from circulation.Then, there are also those who prefer to do it in several stages. Just like binance which does the coin burning process every three months, this burning is part of a commitment to reach 100 million BNB which will later be burned.
How does burning a multichain coin looks like?
will they take a portion from all the chains the project appear on?
Asides the announcement of the burning of unsold token before launch, I try to distance myself from projects with high numbered coins and bad tokenomics. Unnecessary large reserve for team is suspicious
will they take a portion from all the chains the project appear on?
Asides the announcement of the burning of unsold token before launch, I try to distance myself from projects with high numbered coins and bad tokenomics. Unnecessary large reserve for team is suspicious
Jump to: