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.
12 Likes
Reward
12
5
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
PebbleHander
· 01-07 19:43
Real gold and silver fee rebates for holders, this logic makes perfect sense.
View OriginalReply0
MidsommarWallet
· 01-07 04:57
Real fee rebates, this logic makes perfect sense.
Post-hoc armchair critics love to pick the right moment to criticize; when the coin drops, they shout about expansion being a priority—it's hilarious.
Buybacks and development are not mutually exclusive, right? If you insist on opposing them, you're just seeking attention.
I just want to ask, what's there to complain about with a transparent dividend mechanism?
When the price is low, criticize buybacks; when it's high, shut up. I know this move too well.
Honestly, it's just about wanting the coin to explode; all the logic is empty.
This kind of buyback system is actually the orthodox approach. It's much better than those covertly cutting into the leek.
If there's real income, then distribute it—this is much more reliable than just talking big.
View OriginalReply0
TokenUnlocker
· 01-05 11:35
The buyback and dividend system is actually much more reliable than those projects that purely burn tokens. Real income support is what makes it solid.
View OriginalReply0
BakedCatFanboy
· 01-05 11:32
Really, returning fees to holders is exactly how it should be done.
Buybacks and development can run in parallel; only those who insist on choosing one or the other truly don't understand.
Those armchair quarterbacks after the fact are really annoying. When the price drops, they start complaining—it's hilarious.
View OriginalReply0
SmartContractPlumber
· 01-05 11:29
Real cost-driven buybacks—that's the genuine transparent mechanism. Those arguments about "should all-in expand" mostly stem from not understanding permission control and fund flow.
Hyperliquid的代币回购机制值得聊聊。说白了,就是把交易产生的真实手续费拿出来回馈持有人,这事儿本身没啥毛病。
去年底有不少人跳出来批评这套做法,仔细看其实都是"事后诸葛"。这些声音往往卡在币价调整的时段冒泡,一个劲儿讲"资金应该优先投入扩张",看起来自己多清醒似的。但问题是,用真金白银的收入回馈持有者,和投资项目发展并不冲突。回购本身就是透明的资金管理方式,没必要非要二选一。