2026-01-07 07:29:57

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.

BNB0,4%

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.

16 Likes

Reward
16
7
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

FlashLoanPhantom

· 5h ago

90% burn sounds good, but the actual circulating supply is only this 100 million coins, and it still depends on how the project team manages in the future. No private placement, no reserves? That's quite rare. If it weren't for that, I wouldn't believe there's true fairness. 3% tax automatically boosts the price and burns... It's embedded in the contract, so it's more reassuring. At least you can't see anyone secretly changing the rules. But to be fair, fairness mechanisms are one thing, ultimately it still depends on whether the community can support it.

View OriginalReply0

MEVSandwich

· 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

OvertimeSquid

· 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

OldLeekNewSickle

· 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

ZkProofPudding

· 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

Blockchainiac

· 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

GasFeePhobia

· 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