On token buyback mechanics: a 20% automated buyback program won't have the same market impact as a 24-26% program would. Here's why—the initial sell pressure naturally moves the chart downward first. The proposed structure allocates 20% toward supply reduction via buybacks, with another 13% directed to holder rewards. This dual-track approach addresses both deflation and incentive alignment. The suggestion to cap buybacks at 33% rather than 50% makes more economic sense for maintaining price stability and avoiding over-correction in the token's circulating supply dynamics.
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
8 Likes
Reward
8
5
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
TestnetNomad
· 2025-12-20 00:24
It's the same old buyback scheme again. Claiming that the dual-track strategy is just a fancy way to fleece investors.
View OriginalReply0
BearMarketGardener
· 2025-12-19 22:13
Is a 20% buyback really enough? It still feels a bit conservative.
View OriginalReply0
GateUser-26d7f434
· 2025-12-17 17:57
20% buyback is indeed more moderate, but this way it's actually more stable, avoiding another roller coaster ride.
View OriginalReply0
MevTears
· 2025-12-17 17:57
A 33% cap is really more stable; the 50% approach should have been cut long ago, as it easily leads to overcorrection and shooting oneself in the foot.
View OriginalReply0
PaperHandSister
· 2025-12-17 17:52
Ah, it's that old story of buybacks again. Basically, they're just afraid of dumping the price. What's the essential difference between 20% and 24%? The market still cuts the leeks.
On token buyback mechanics: a 20% automated buyback program won't have the same market impact as a 24-26% program would. Here's why—the initial sell pressure naturally moves the chart downward first. The proposed structure allocates 20% toward supply reduction via buybacks, with another 13% directed to holder rewards. This dual-track approach addresses both deflation and incentive alignment. The suggestion to cap buybacks at 33% rather than 50% makes more economic sense for maintaining price stability and avoiding over-correction in the token's circulating supply dynamics.