Here's an example of tokenomics and launch that didn't go so well. Simply not enough protection built into their tokenomics (figure below). The scary part is seed investors that currently are up 31X compared to their investment are in the process of fully vesting their investment every 3 months, which is high selling pressure until Nov 2025. Current vesting schedule that is underway is mostly from the 10% for seed investors, 15% for team, and 2% for advisors, for a maximal total of 27% of potential selling pressure. Chance are that some of those have already been sold, but certainly more is to come. With transaction volume on a decreasing trend, this doesn't look good for market adoption that overshadow selling pressure. Roughly 4% of the supply vest every month.
While this is a good project in terms of utility, I fear the demand won't be enough until at least 2026 which creates a negative network effect that incentivise selling pressure.
In terms of revenue and sustainability of the team behind the project. https://growjo.com/company/Covalent, looks like they generate roughly $15M per year to sustain a team of 107 employees which average $140K per employee which is low. So, likely they will have to sell more of the tokens to sustain their team size unless they scale down operations. In comparison, Google generate $1.5M per employees.
Staking reward is between 3% and 20% based on the staking ratio, which is not linked to actual revenue being generated, so that's potentially more selling pressure that is not under the team's control anymore.
Token in circulation is currently only at half, so not looking good.
I couldn't find information related to revenue streams and transaction fees making their way directly back into the tokenomic model, so maybe these fees only move into the team's pocket, so only indirect value to token holders. Show Less
3
