Is the hyperinflation a real problem when there is no price? In the beginning, all coins value is 0. In any case, the price, its the mining electricity cost. The initial high supply, could depreciate the value of the coin because the miners take a lot of coins. But this Its so bad? If you see other coins that make opposite way, like linear emission, they take a lot of value in the beginning, but from that moment they begin to fall, until they find a stable price. Tidecoin would have a very low price at first, but as soon as it attracts the miners / users, and due to its low max supply, I do not think it will go down to 0 sat, no matter how much the reward be. That could help to have a good distribution, since miners have a perception of an excess of coins. In six month the miners take 1/4 of the initial reward, and if the project have a good evolution, they have to replant the sell price. There are no written rules, nor any manual that can say that excess emission at the beginning is a better or worse option. Moreover, I think it is a minor issue, the success or failure of a project (in the long term, not for a bump-dump scheme) depends on many other things. Making a successful coin is like a marathon, the least important thing is how fast you start. My suggestion, wait six months and email tradeogre.
Is the hyperinflation a real problem when there is no price? In the beginning, all coins value is 0. In any case, the price, its the mining electricity cost. The initial high supply, could depreciate the value of the coin because the miners take a lot of coins. But this Its so bad? If you see other coins that make opposite way, like linear emission, they take a lot of value in the beginning, but from that moment they begin to fall, until they find a stable price. Tidecoin would have a very low price at first, but as soon as it attracts the miners / users, and due to its low max supply, I do not think it will go down to 0 sat, no matter how much the reward be. That could help to have a good distribution, since miners have a perception of an excess of coins. In six month the miners take 1/4 of the initial reward, and if the project have a good evolution, they have to replant the sell price. There are no written rules, nor any manual that can say that excess emission at the beginning is a better or worse option. Moreover, I think it is a minor issue, the success or failure of a project (in the long term, not for a bump-dump scheme) depends on many other things. Making a successful coin is like a marathon, the least important thing is how fast you start. My suggestion, wait six months and email tradeogre.

Is the hyperinflation a real problem when there is no price? In the beginning, all coins value is 0. In any case, the price, its the mining electricity cost. The initial high supply, could depreciate the value of the coin because the miners take a lot of coins. But this Its so bad? If you see other coins that make opposite way, like linear emission, they take a lot of value in the beginning, but from that moment they begin to fall, until they find a stable price. Tidecoin would have a very low price at first, but as soon as it attracts the miners / users, and due to its low max supply, I do not think it will go down to 0 sat, no matter how much the reward be. That could help to have a good distribution, since miners have a perception of an excess of coins. In six month the miners take 1/4 of the initial reward, and if the project have a good evolution, they have to replant the sell price. There are no written rules, nor any manual that can say that excess emission at the beginning is a better or worse option. Moreover, I think it is a minor issue, the success or failure of a project (in the long term, not for a bump-dump scheme) depends on many other things. Making a successful coin is like a marathon, the least important thing is how fast you start. My suggestion, wait six months and email tradeogre.

Is the hyperinflation a real problem when there is no price? In the beginning, all coins value is 0. In any case, the price, its the mining electricity cost. The initial high supply, could depreciate the value of the coin because the miners take a lot of coins. But this Its so bad? If you see other coins that make opposite way, like linear emission, they take a lot of value in the beginning, but from that moment they begin to fall, until they find a stable price. Tidecoin would have a very low price at first, but as soon as it attracts the miners / users, and due to its low max supply, I do not think it will go down to 0 sat, no matter how much the reward be. That could help to have a good distribution, since miners have a perception of an excess of coins. In six month the miners take 1/4 of the initial reward, and if the project have a good evolution, they have to replant the sell price. There are no written rules, nor any manual that can say that excess emission at the beginning is a better or worse option. Moreover, I think it is a minor issue, the success or failure of a project (in the long term, not for a bump-dump scheme) depends on many other things. Making a successful coin is like a marathon, the least important thing is how fast you start. My suggestion, wait six months and email tradeogre.