Burn, Buyback, and Treasury in Fogo: Which Mechanism Is Truly Effective.
I have seen too many projects turn burn into a stage, truly ironic, the longer I stay, the more I only trust cash flow diagrams and rules that no one is allowed to bend.
With Fogo, I think the token has to sit inside the product pipeline, every time users generate fees, those fees should automatically pass through an on chain router, splitting into operations, into the treasury reserve, and into value returned to the token. The buyback should come from net revenue after operations, run on a fixed schedule, execute through a low impact mechanism like twap, with slippage limits and an emergency stop, the repurchased tokens should either be locked with a clear term, or streamed to stakers under defined vesting, so it does not become a short term gift.
The burn should be tied to core usage behavior, burning a portion of fees at the moment they are created, so supply declines with real demand, maybe the burn does not need to be large, it just needs to be steady and impossible to fake. The treasury must publish its multisig wallet, publish spending rules, and publish periodic reports, so the community can see runway and discipline.
If Fogo can deliver this trio, the token becomes the mechanism of the product, not a story for the market, and will you choose to believe in burn because it is easy to see, or believe in buyback and treasury because they are harder to do.
