2026-01-05 09:22:01

Recently, discussions about the ASTER project in the market have been quite lively. A well-known industry figure personally invested over $2 million to buy the token and continued to add to their position. This move has indeed attracted a lot of attention.

What’s truly worth pondering is the mechanism design behind the project. According to official information, 80% of the protocol’s daily revenue is used for automatic repurchase and burning of ASTER. Logically, this creates an interesting cycle: increased trading volume → increased buyback and burn → decreased circulating supply → pressure on supply side is relieved. It sounds good in theory, but the actual effectiveness remains to be verified over time.

$ETH $BNB $ASTER

We often hear two opinions. One believes this mechanism is a long-term value support engine, while the other thinks it might be a short-term market narrative. Honestly, any new economic model needs to be tested in actual operation. Large capital investments indeed represent some confidence, and the project mechanism also reflects the ideas of the designers — but ultimately, only the market will answer with time.

What’s your view? In your judgment, is the long-term buyback and burn mechanism a genuine value driver, or are there other factors at play?

ASTER-3,78%

ETH-2,35%

BNB-0,51%

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.

21 Likes

Reward
21
4
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

TokenStorm

· 6h ago

80% buyback and burn sounds impressive, but what does the on-chain data say? We need to see if the actual trading volume has kept up; otherwise, it's just empty talk. $2 million sounds great, but the timing of this big investor entering the market is worth considering... I bet they're also calculating the risk factor. This kind of mechanism has quite a bit of arbitrage space; it all depends on who can hold out the longest in the eye of the storm. Anyway, I'm already mentally prepared to be harvested. Typically, this type of burn model performs well in backtesting data, but actually running it on-chain is a different story. Still, it doesn't affect my all-in approach [dog head]. Is it value-driven or narrative? Honestly, I can't tell right now, but when transaction fees are low, I still tentatively build positions. Disclaimer: This is not investment advice. Let's wait and see the on-chain activity over the next 72 hours; the movements of whale wallets are often the most genuine barometer.

View OriginalReply0

ConsensusBot

· 01-05 09:52

2 million dollars in and this is it? Let's wait and see. I'm tired of hearing the buyback and burn story.

View OriginalReply0

CrossChainMessenger

· 01-05 09:51

$2,000,000就敢all in，要么是大聪慧要么是大傻批，没中间选项 Buyback and burn sounds really tempting, but look at how many projects have said that in history... and in the end? Wait and see, it's too early to draw conclusions now, anyway I’ll just observe for the time being. This logic is a bit like self-hype; does trading volume really increase because of burning? I think, having a large amount of funds doesn't necessarily mean the project is good; sometimes it can be a risk signal.

View OriginalReply0

GamefiGreenie

· 01-05 09:37

$2 million entry is still adding positions. Is this guy really convinced or just trying to cut the leeks? --- 80% buyback and burn sounds great, but trading volume is hard to judge even if it sounds good. --- I just want to know if this $2 million was locked in advance, so it doesn’t just run away later. --- The mechanism looks good on paper, but the key is on-chain data; otherwise, it’s all just PPT. --- Honestly, I’ve seen this kind of logic too many times in other projects. It’s just a routine. --- Sellers have too much say. I’ll wait for market validation before making any moves. --- People adding to positions might just be part of the hype. Don’t get caught up in the rhythm, everyone. --- Buyback and burn itself is fine, but I’m worried the trading volume might be inflated, and then everything is just an illusion. --- It sounds good, but in the end, it’s all about who can run faster, right? --- The mechanism design isn’t bad, but trust in the Web3 circle is too costly.

View OriginalReply0