The design concept of this project is quite interesting. The total token supply is set at 1 billion tokens, with 90% directly burned, leaving only 100 million tokens in actual circulation, which is a rather aggressive scarcity arrangement.



There are no private sales or reserved allocations in the issuance method. The entire contract code is open source and transparent, making it a truly fair mechanism from this perspective.

The trading interface is also straightforward—buy and sell each incur a 3% tax. This tax is automatically triggered to buy back and burn tokens whenever the threshold of 0.1 BNB is reached. The entire process is embedded in the contract, leaving no room for human intervention. This level of transparency allows participants to clearly see how funds are flowing.
BNB-1.83%
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.
  • Reward
  • 6
  • Repost
  • Share
Comment
0/400
MEVSandwichvip
· 01-07 08:00
90% burn sounds great, but with such a small actual circulating supply, once whales dump, the price will crash to the center of the earth.
View OriginalReply0
OvertimeSquidvip
· 01-07 07:58
I think this set of logic is a bit too idealistic. Destroying 90% sounds great, but only 100 million tokens are actually circulating. Whether the price remains strong or not depends entirely on subsequent buying pressure...
View OriginalReply0
OldLeekNewSicklevip
· 01-07 07:58
90% burn sounds pretty extreme, but I still feel like I've heard this scarcity pitch quite a few times... However, without private placements, it really can fool people, gotta say the project team is quite clever. Automatically pulling up the price and burning tokens written into the contract is a highlight, but the 3% tax, frankly, still falls within the framework of a Ponzi scheme, just with a different disguise to make it look more comfortable. The real issue isn't whether the mechanism is transparent or not, but who has the ability to take over later. Just for your reference, everyone. I'm just here to review the tricks I fell for.
View OriginalReply0
ZkProofPuddingvip
· 01-07 07:52
Destroying 90% of the supply is a bit harsh, just to create scarcity? It still depends on how they manage it later.
View OriginalReply0
Blockchainiacvip
· 01-07 07:45
90% direct burn? That's a really harsh move, just worried that they'll come up with some excuse to unlock it later...
View OriginalReply0
GasFeePhobiavip
· 01-07 07:34
90% burned? Alright, I've seen this trick too many times, and in the end, it's just big players cutting the leeks. Open source and transparent? Bro, open source contract code ≠ the team won't cut you. Be careful not to be fooled. Automatic pump and burn sounds great, but I'm just worried it might be another script where it quickly pumps up early on and no one is left to take the bag later.
View OriginalReply0
Trade Crypto Anywhere Anytime
qrCode
Scan to download Gate App
Community
English
  • 简体中文
  • English
  • Tiếng Việt
  • 繁體中文
  • Español
  • Русский
  • Français (Afrique)
  • Português (Portugal)
  • Bahasa Indonesia
  • 日本語
  • بالعربية
  • Українська
  • Português (Brasil)