#dusk $DUSK @Dusk
Last night, while matching DUSK transaction fees against successful receipts, I noticed the average fee was almost meaningless without seeing who paid it.
If the top 1% of transactions supplies a large share of all fees, DUSK may look busier economically than it really is. A few expensive contract calls, deployments, or replacement transactions could carry the revenue while ordinary transfers contribute very little.
That is why I would separate fees by transaction type, application, and percentile. I want median fee versus top-1% fee, contract-call share versus transfer share, and fee revenue per 1,000 successful transactions. Replacement rate matters too if users repeatedly resubmit at higher gas prices, some apparent fee pressure may reflect execution friction, not genuine demand.
The harder comparison is activity versus sustainability. DUSK rewards can rise in absolute terms while fees still represent only a tiny fraction of newly emitted DUSK.
I would calculate how many successful transactions generate 1 DUSK in fees, then model the daily volume required for fees to equal 1%, 5%, and 10% of emissions.
One doubt remains. If a small cluster of applications pays most fees, is the network discovering durable utility or just depending on a few unusually expensive workflows?
Last night, while matching DUSK transaction fees against successful receipts, I noticed the average fee was almost meaningless without seeing who paid it.
If the top 1% of transactions supplies a large share of all fees, DUSK may look busier economically than it really is. A few expensive contract calls, deployments, or replacement transactions could carry the revenue while ordinary transfers contribute very little.
That is why I would separate fees by transaction type, application, and percentile. I want median fee versus top-1% fee, contract-call share versus transfer share, and fee revenue per 1,000 successful transactions. Replacement rate matters too if users repeatedly resubmit at higher gas prices, some apparent fee pressure may reflect execution friction, not genuine demand.
The harder comparison is activity versus sustainability. DUSK rewards can rise in absolute terms while fees still represent only a tiny fraction of newly emitted DUSK.
I would calculate how many successful transactions generate 1 DUSK in fees, then model the daily volume required for fees to equal 1%, 5%, and 10% of emissions.
One doubt remains. If a small cluster of applications pays most fees, is the network discovering durable utility or just depending on a few unusually expensive workflows?