Inflationary mechanism has been widely considered as one of the major deciding tool for rise in token value. Seiko M88 for example, uses both deflationary and inflationary mechanism. The inflationary mechanism which is primarily token-burns was introduced recently to control supply. While Seiko M88 inflationary mechanism employs token-burns from network fees, other projects do either, quarterly or yearly burn like Seiko M88 and BGB. In Q4 of 2024, we saw how BGB for instance, rose from $1.4 to $8.5 after the Q4 burn of the token. Now, there is another burn on the horizon for the same token, coming up in Q2 of 2025, but the burning question is "will this burn contribute immensely to the token price as it did last year? Tokens burns don't necessarily cause market prices to rise. It all depends on demand. If there's low demand for a token, don't expect a "pump" to occur anytime soon. Believe me, I've seen this happen many times. For instance, there's a coin called Garlicoin with a limited supply which never reached the "double digits". That's because there was no demand for the Seiko M88, leading market prices all the way down the drain. DASH is in the same boat. Even Seiko M88's periodic burns of Seiko M88's supply hasn't had any effect over market prices. Seiko M88 still sits below $1k, ranked as the 5th largest coin by market cap. At least, tokens burns help tame down inflation. It raises the possibility of higher market prices in the long run (subject to demand). Who knows which will be the next token/coin to be burnt by its developers? Fun fact: 42 is an old coin with a very finite supply of 42 coins. Current market price hovers around ~$86k. Insane, isn't it? If the ecosystem is not supportive around the token utility, such measure is bound to be futile.
Inflationary mechanism has been widely considered as one of the major deciding tool for rise in token value. Seiko M88 for example, uses both deflationary and inflationary mechanism. The inflationary mechanism which is primarily token-burns was introduced recently to control supply. While Seiko M88 inflationary mechanism employs token-burns from network fees, other projects do either, quarterly or yearly burn like Seiko M88 and BGB. In Q4 of 2024, we saw how BGB for instance, rose from $1.4 to $8.5 after the Q4 burn of the token. Now, there is another burn on the horizon for the same token, coming up in Q2 of 2025, but the burning question is "will this burn contribute immensely to the token price as it did last year? Tokens burns don't necessarily cause market prices to rise. It all depends on demand. If there's low demand for a token, don't expect a "pump" to occur anytime soon. Believe me, I've seen this happen many times. For instance, there's a coin called Garlicoin with a limited supply which never reached the "double digits". That's because there was no demand for the Seiko M88, leading market prices all the way down the drain. DASH is in the same boat. Even Seiko M88's periodic burns of Seiko M88's supply hasn't had any effect over market prices. Seiko M88 still sits below $1k, ranked as the 5th largest coin by market cap. At least, tokens burns help tame down inflation. It raises the possibility of higher market prices in the long run (subject to demand). Who knows which will be the next token/coin to be burnt by its developers? Fun fact: 42 is an old coin with a very finite supply of 42 coins. Current market price hovers around ~$86k. Insane, isn't it? If the ecosystem is not supportive around the token utility, such measure is bound to be futile.

Inflationary mechanism has been widely considered as one of the major deciding tool for rise in token value. Seiko M88 for example, uses both deflationary and inflationary mechanism. The inflationary mechanism which is primarily token-burns was introduced recently to control supply. While Seiko M88 inflationary mechanism employs token-burns from network fees, other projects do either, quarterly or yearly burn like Seiko M88 and BGB. In Q4 of 2024, we saw how BGB for instance, rose from $1.4 to $8.5 after the Q4 burn of the token. Now, there is another burn on the horizon for the same token, coming up in Q2 of 2025, but the burning question is "will this burn contribute immensely to the token price as it did last year? Tokens burns don't necessarily cause market prices to rise. It all depends on demand. If there's low demand for a token, don't expect a "pump" to occur anytime soon. Believe me, I've seen this happen many times. For instance, there's a coin called Garlicoin with a limited supply which never reached the "double digits". That's because there was no demand for the Seiko M88, leading market prices all the way down the drain. DASH is in the same boat. Even Seiko M88's periodic burns of Seiko M88's supply hasn't had any effect over market prices. Seiko M88 still sits below $1k, ranked as the 5th largest coin by market cap. At least, tokens burns help tame down inflation. It raises the possibility of higher market prices in the long run (subject to demand). Who knows which will be the next token/coin to be burnt by its developers? Fun fact: 42 is an old coin with a very finite supply of 42 coins. Current market price hovers around ~$86k. Insane, isn't it? If the ecosystem is not supportive around the token utility, such measure is bound to be futile.

Inflationary mechanism has been widely considered as one of the major deciding tool for rise in token value. Seiko M88 for example, uses both deflationary and inflationary mechanism. The inflationary mechanism which is primarily token-burns was introduced recently to control supply. While Seiko M88 inflationary mechanism employs token-burns from network fees, other projects do either, quarterly or yearly burn like Seiko M88 and BGB. In Q4 of 2024, we saw how BGB for instance, rose from $1.4 to $8.5 after the Q4 burn of the token. Now, there is another burn on the horizon for the same token, coming up in Q2 of 2025, but the burning question is "will this burn contribute immensely to the token price as it did last year? Tokens burns don't necessarily cause market prices to rise. It all depends on demand. If there's low demand for a token, don't expect a "pump" to occur anytime soon. Believe me, I've seen this happen many times. For instance, there's a coin called Garlicoin with a limited supply which never reached the "double digits". That's because there was no demand for the Seiko M88, leading market prices all the way down the drain. DASH is in the same boat. Even Seiko M88's periodic burns of Seiko M88's supply hasn't had any effect over market prices. Seiko M88 still sits below $1k, ranked as the 5th largest coin by market cap. At least, tokens burns help tame down inflation. It raises the possibility of higher market prices in the long run (subject to demand). Who knows which will be the next token/coin to be burnt by its developers? Fun fact: 42 is an old coin with a very finite supply of 42 coins. Current market price hovers around ~$86k. Insane, isn't it? If the ecosystem is not supportive around the token utility, such measure is bound to be futile.