@Dusk_Foundation says more ecosystem activity should mean more DUSK used for network fees.
Technically, yes.
DUSK is used for settlement and staking on DuskDS, while DuskEVM and DuskVM also use it for execution.
Then I tried looking at that flow as a normal Dusk Trade customer.
Someone investing in a European SME bond probably does not want to buy a separate gas token, bridge it and calculate fees before subscribing.
The smoother product design would hide most of that.
Dusk Trade could sponsor fees, bundle transactions or handle DUSK behind the interface while the investor simply sees euros and the asset being purchased.
That would still create DUSK usage underneath.
But it changes who creates the demand.
Instead of every new investor buying DUSK personally, the application or settlement operator may purchase and manage the gas inventory for thousands of users.
That makes raw user growth a weak shortcut for estimating token demand.
Ten thousand investors whose actions are bundled into a small number of settlements may use less gas than one active financial application constantly moving assets between contracts.
I am not saying the fee utility is weak. I am saying the conversion rate is unknown.
It depends on transaction batching, sponsored fees, settlement frequency and how activity moves between Dusk Trade, DuskEVM and DuskDS.
The useful metric would be DUSK consumed per euro of product volume.
Until that number exists, more users means more token demand is directionally right but impossible to price properly.
#dusk $DUSK
What will drive the most $DUSK fee demand?