#termmax @TermMax
Whenever a group splits a bill, I notice the same thing: the final amount matters, but who pays now and who pays later changes how fair the whole thing feels.
That’s roughly how I’ve been looking at @TermMax tokenomics. The 1 billion TMX fixed supply is easy to remember. The harder part is how that supply moves through different groups over time. The white paper allocates 29% to ecosystem/developer grants, 28% to seed investors, 15% to the team and 15% to protocol distribution programs, with the remainder going to treasury, advisors and liquidity.
The timing is what interests me. Seed investors have a 12-month cliff followed by 24-month linear vesting. Team and advisor allocations wait 12 months too, then release over 30 months. Meanwhile, protocol distribution has no cliff, and the ecosystem allocation is meant for longer-term development and integrations.
So I don’t really see @TermMax tokenomics as percentages on a pie chart. I see an alignment experiment. Different groups receive access on different timelines, and somehow those incentives have to produce actual protocol participation rather than activity that disappears when distributions slow down.
That’s the uncomfortable question for #TermMax: after the incentives have done their job, who still has a reason to stay?
For me, that will say more about TermMax’s token design than the 1 billion number ever could......
$ACE $ONG $BNB
Whenever a group splits a bill, I notice the same thing: the final amount matters, but who pays now and who pays later changes how fair the whole thing feels.
That’s roughly how I’ve been looking at @TermMax tokenomics. The 1 billion TMX fixed supply is easy to remember. The harder part is how that supply moves through different groups over time. The white paper allocates 29% to ecosystem/developer grants, 28% to seed investors, 15% to the team and 15% to protocol distribution programs, with the remainder going to treasury, advisors and liquidity.
The timing is what interests me. Seed investors have a 12-month cliff followed by 24-month linear vesting. Team and advisor allocations wait 12 months too, then release over 30 months. Meanwhile, protocol distribution has no cliff, and the ecosystem allocation is meant for longer-term development and integrations.
So I don’t really see @TermMax tokenomics as percentages on a pie chart. I see an alignment experiment. Different groups receive access on different timelines, and somehow those incentives have to produce actual protocol participation rather than activity that disappears when distributions slow down.
That’s the uncomfortable question for #TermMax: after the incentives have done their job, who still has a reason to stay?
For me, that will say more about TermMax’s token design than the 1 billion number ever could......
$ACE $ONG $BNB