2026-01-07 23:21:53

An interesting tokenomics model: a certain privacy public chain project conducts three burn operations daily. The process is as follows—dedicated addresses continuously buy the project tokens, burn them, and then use this quota to mint the corresponding stablecoins. What are the benefits of this design? It can control the circulating supply while increasing the supply of stablecoins within the ecosystem.

Even more impressive is their privacy public chain plan. Once the privacy public chain goes live, it will also allow direct mining to obtain native assets. Currently, over 21 million tokens have been planned for mining space. This combination of strategies makes sense—burning + stablecoins + mining—using practical actions to support the long-term value of the token.

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.

12 Likes

Reward
12
8
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

BearMarketMonk

· 5m ago

Wow, this combination of destruction + stablecoins + mining really has some substance.

View OriginalReply0

CounterIndicator

· 01-09 01:17

The process of destroying and minting stablecoins is a bit particular, but it depends on the execution.

View OriginalReply0

AmateurDAOWatcher

· 01-07 23:51

Burning, minting, and mining—sounds good, but I'm just worried it's another scam to fleece investors with a different disguise.

View OriginalReply0

FlashLoanLarry

· 01-07 23:49

daily triple burns? ngl that's just wrapping value extraction in sustainability theater... but the stablecoin minting angle is where it gets spicy 🤔 opportunity cost arbitrage if you squint hard enough

Reply0

quietly_staking

· 01-07 23:46

Hmm... I've seen this trick of burning and minting coins quite a few times, but are you serious about doing it three times a day?

View OriginalReply0

MentalWealthHarvester

· 01-07 23:43

Wait, this logic of destroying and re-minting... sounds like putting money in the left pocket and taking it out from the right pocket? The real value still depends on the mining part. The 21 million cap sounds like a lot, but it depends on the actual participation level. The practice of destroying and controlling circulation has been played out long ago. The key is whether the project team can truly develop the privacy public chain; otherwise, it's just talk on paper. If this model can be successfully implemented, it’s indeed interesting. But I’m more concerned about the mining cost and the return ratio—don’t end up turning it into another variant of a money-grabbing scheme.

View OriginalReply0

MoodFollowsPrice

· 01-07 23:34

Well... I've seen this trick too many times. It sounds nice, but it's just the same old story with a different coat.

View OriginalReply0

StrawberryIce

· 01-07 23:32

Destroying minting and mining in one go, it does seem to have some real substance.

View OriginalReply0