Token model 2.0 like Continuous token model


#1

Hi, we know fixed total supply model is good for asset token because people appreciate scarcity.

But I think continuous token model is better for utility token because objective is not increasing value of single token but increasing benefits.

There are a couple of new token models.

The objective is to come up with new token models which satisfy…

  1. mintable ( we can keep rewarding key contributors like miners )

  2. have liquidity from day one

  3. no need for ICO or exchanges

  4. useful to incentivize all contributors toward single goal

bonding curve model

burn-and-mint model

https://multicoin.capital/2018/02/13/new-models-utility-tokens/

And this is my proposal which combine bonding curve model and burn-and-mint model.

Please share your idea.

Thanks!


#2

I fail to understand what are the advantages of having a dynamic formula. Is it only to allow minting tokens for free?
Could you expand why this holds true when you mint an infinite amount of tokens?

If the token’s utility is clear, well defined and attached to a real world value how can you motivate the price increase based on the token quantity?


#3

Dynamic bonding curves can be useful in very specific circumstances that require more than a 1 dimensional factor to affect the price of the token.
In your medium article the formula used is not really dynamic, as it still only uses the total supply in the function. This is what normal token bonding curves are, a function of the total supply.

I do agree that the use of bonding curves can create new sustainable token models.

For more on dynamic bonding curves applications, see an article I wrote earlier: https://tokeneconomy.co/dynamic-token-bonding-curves-41d36e43befa


#4

Thanks for your feedback.

I think eco system being able to mint token free is valuable.
Ethereum is minting tokens for miners for free.
It could change after PoS though…

And I think even though token’s utility is clear, we can ( should ) not have market price until project became successful unless you mention ICO. I mean we need enough token holders to have liquidity. and only ICO generate speculation markets so far.

Benefit of bonding curve is we can have liquidity from day one without ICO or speculation.

But you may be right.
Once project have enough token holders and listed on exchanges, price should be set by market…


#5

Sorry my word choice was incorrect.
My suggestion was adjusting formula at some events may be helpful…

Anyway thanks for your feedback and your article is interesting.


#6

Could you list week points of bonding curved token model?
Since I am a fan of bonding curved model, my opinion is biased.