2025-12-25 08:24:05

Some emerging token projects frequently attract retail investors with concepts like token burns and dividends, but their mechanism design has fatal flaws. Although burns seem impressive, they do not change the essence of the project—lacking real application scenarios and trading depth support.

Even more painful is the dividend model: claiming to distribute dividends based on holding tokens, but the more holders there are, the less trading occurs, and dividends become meaningless. This leads to a classic death spiral: price drops → users exit → liquidity dries up → further decline. A cyclical pattern.

Many people hope that market makers will step in to rescue the situation, but in reality, the principal is often slowly eroded without notice. Experienced investors understand that the outcome of such models is usually only one—account balance zero. Recognizing these risky projects is far more important than blindly chasing high returns.

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.

10 Likes

Reward
10
6
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

MEVSupportGroup

· 5h ago

Burning, dividends... It makes me want to laugh, they're all just tricks, the key is that no one uses them. Wait, aren't these the few pitfalls I fell into last year... Really, the more people hold the coins, the more dangerous it is. The dividend pool is drained very quickly. Now I stay far away from these kinds of projects. No matter what model they use, they can't save air coins without real applications.

View OriginalReply0

ApeEscapeArtist

· 6h ago

Destroying that outdated set is pointless; it's just a new trick to fleece investors. Claiming to distribute dividends is actually the final struggle of an air coin.

View OriginalReply0

AirdropHuntress

· 6h ago

Burning and dividends? Haha, I've seen too many projects with flawed tokenomics design. The key still depends on trading depth; without real application scenarios, this stone will eventually crush people. Historical data shows that this kind of death spiral usually ends with accounts going to zero. Don't be greedy.

View OriginalReply0

CommunitySlacker

· 6h ago

I'm tired of the rhetoric about burning and dividends. Honestly, it's just a pretext to harvest retail investors. Holding tokens for dividends? Uh... if trading volume is dead, do dividends rely on air? Why does no one question this logic? I've seen too many people wait for the whales, only to end up with their accounts wiped out. Truly.

View OriginalReply0

DataOnlooker

· 6h ago

Destroying is just a sham, just for show to scare people. It's the same old trick—dividends and holding coins. Someone's going to be the bagholder again this time. Wait, where's the title?

View OriginalReply0

SerumSqueezer

· 6h ago

It's the same old trick of destruction and dividends, really don't believe it. I've seen too many crypto enthusiasts get completely scammed by these number games. Once the death spiral starts, there's no escape. The moment liquidity dries up, the account is doomed. Whales? Ha, they've already run away, leaving only the bagholders. Identifying these kinds of schemes is actually simple—if there's no real application scenario, stay away. No matter how high the APY, it's just an illusion. At least ten people around me have fallen for this.

View OriginalReply0