The $LUNC community just voted to raise the burn tax to 1.5%. Reality check: burning dead supply is painfully slow. You could watch it for years and barely see a dent.
Supply policy feels like the easiest knob to turn, but it's usually the least impactful. This matters when similar debates pop up — like whenever the $PI lockup conversation resurfaces.
The takeaway? Token burns sound aggressive, but they rarely move the needle fast enough to matter in real-time market dynamics. If a project is leaning hard on supply reduction as the main value driver, that's a red flag. Demand creation, utility expansion, and actual adoption matter way more than tweaking circulating supply at the margins.
Watch how long it takes $LUNC's burn to show up in price action. That lag is the lesson.
Supply policy feels like the easiest knob to turn, but it's usually the least impactful. This matters when similar debates pop up — like whenever the $PI lockup conversation resurfaces.
The takeaway? Token burns sound aggressive, but they rarely move the needle fast enough to matter in real-time market dynamics. If a project is leaning hard on supply reduction as the main value driver, that's a red flag. Demand creation, utility expansion, and actual adoption matter way more than tweaking circulating supply at the margins.
Watch how long it takes $LUNC's burn to show up in price action. That lag is the lesson.