2025-12-30 09:27:34

The tokenomics design plan of a certain project has surfaced, with a fairly clear distribution logic: participants in the first two seasons will receive one-fourth of the total token supply, and users in future seasons will also retain a quarter of the proportion. This phased release approach not only considers the interests of early participants but also reserves space for subsequent ecosystem development. From a tokenomics perspective, such a balanced distribution method is worth paying attention to.

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.

9 Likes

Reward
9
6
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

TheMemefather

· 3h ago

A quarter for a quarter, sounds good, but I'm just worried they'll secretly issue more later on.

View OriginalReply0

TokenDustCollector

· 3h ago

An early 25% sounds good, but it really depends on the actual implementation to get it into your hands. The distribution logic still depends on subsequent execution.

View OriginalReply0

CryptoTarotReader

· 3h ago

Early quarter, subsequent quarter... sounds good, but the real test is still ahead.

View OriginalReply0

WhaleWatcher

· 3h ago

Early participants can get a quarter, and later entrants also get a quarter? That logic sounds good, but the real test is still ahead.

View OriginalReply0

LiquidityHunter

· 3h ago

One quarter for early participants, and another quarter for subsequent ones? This allocation seems a bit too evenly distributed. It feels like it's paving the way for later participants—what about the early bird advantage?

View OriginalReply0

CodeZeroBasis

· 3h ago

Early entry quarter, subsequent also quarter? This allocation logic feels a bit interesting, but it depends on where the remaining half goes—reserved for the team or for liquidity?

View OriginalReply0