The old problems in the crypto market still persist—project dumps, whale manipulations, retail investors getting burned. But there is a project trying to use a "flexible bottoming" mechanism to reverse this dilemma, and the idea is quite interesting.
The core logic of the mechanism is actually simple: the bottom price is set at 200U/ trillion, while the current market price is 100U/ trillion. Large holders can proactively redeem at the bottom price to earn the price difference, and the tokens obtained are directly burned instead of being dumped into the market. The U obtained continues to buy tokens to promote circulation.
This design simultaneously triggers four effects—rapid destruction of circulating supply, alleviation of market pressure, reduction of whale holdings, and creation of upward price momentum. It sounds like building a self-sustaining positive cycle.
From a mechanism design perspective, a good mechanism should not be a tool for cutting profits from retail investors, but rather a design that truly adds value to the ecosystem. Such attempts are still relatively rare in the crypto market. Regardless of the final outcome, this kind of thinking reflects industry practitioners' consideration of market structure issues.
Friends interested in exploring this kind of innovative mechanism can follow the progress in this area.
View Original
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.
7 Likes
Reward
7
5
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
CoffeeOnChain
· 22h ago
Wait, doubling the bottom price will automatically destroy the circulating supply? Something feels off. Don't big investors usually cash out first and then run?
View OriginalReply0
RealYieldWizard
· 22h ago
Sounds good, but can this logic hold up in real execution? I always feel that big players wouldn't cooperate that easily.
View OriginalReply0
ForkLibertarian
· 22h ago
It sounds like just a bottom support, but this logic is indeed less disgusting than the traditional leek-cutting tricks.
Can this kind of play really destroy the chips? I feel like in the end, the big players still eat the meat, and we drink the soup.
No matter how beautiful the mechanism is, it ultimately depends on execution. Don't become another new way of cutting.
I'm a bit interested, but it depends on how the subsequent market moves.
I've heard this theory too many times; the key still depends on who is controlling the market.
View OriginalReply0
LiquidatedNotStirred
· 22h ago
Wait, this logic sounds good, but can it really prevent big players from fleeing? It still seems to depend on execution.
View OriginalReply0
ZenChainWalker
· 22h ago
Hey, wait a minute. This bottom support mechanism sounds a bit suspicious. Will big investors really obediently pay out at the bottom support price?
The old problems in the crypto market still persist—project dumps, whale manipulations, retail investors getting burned. But there is a project trying to use a "flexible bottoming" mechanism to reverse this dilemma, and the idea is quite interesting.
The core logic of the mechanism is actually simple: the bottom price is set at 200U/ trillion, while the current market price is 100U/ trillion. Large holders can proactively redeem at the bottom price to earn the price difference, and the tokens obtained are directly burned instead of being dumped into the market. The U obtained continues to buy tokens to promote circulation.
This design simultaneously triggers four effects—rapid destruction of circulating supply, alleviation of market pressure, reduction of whale holdings, and creation of upward price momentum. It sounds like building a self-sustaining positive cycle.
From a mechanism design perspective, a good mechanism should not be a tool for cutting profits from retail investors, but rather a design that truly adds value to the ecosystem. Such attempts are still relatively rare in the crypto market. Regardless of the final outcome, this kind of thinking reflects industry practitioners' consideration of market structure issues.
Friends interested in exploring this kind of innovative mechanism can follow the progress in this area.