No pre-minted token allocation: this is probably my ultimate criteria for sustainable economic model. I hate to see 50% of the supply being allocated for free to people. I can't stress enough how happy I am to see another project launching this way, it's very rare.
Released handle through Initial Contributors: 10%, PoW (mining) 35% of the supply, the other 55% through contribution of code, etc. The DAO handles the allocation of these tokens based on value created. As long as the distribution of tokens is decentralized or in worst case centralized (hopefully in this case the centralized authority with control would take good decision for the future of the chain like a benevolent dictatorship). I can't currently see the ownership distribution, hopefully the mining is distributed, but it's possible there are a few centralized nodes that have more horsepower to extract more mining rewards and will consequently have more control. Let's hope it's not the case, but it would have to be investigated.
Currently, the market cap in circulation is $2.6M with a $130M fully diluted marketcap (however I'm not overly concerned about the tiny % of circulating supply compared to fully diluted, since the project is still in early phase and the release is controlled through mining or through development of useful component of the overall architecture that hopefully would drive adoption.
Token started being mined in March 2023, so very early. Most Layer-1 that achieve success can reach ~$30B marketcap, so there's plenty of room to grow.
In terms of tokenomic model it's simple, and should be sustainable as long as the adoption reach critical mass. I'm considering being a contributors of additional pieces of architecture to support adoption.
The critical thing to assess in a project like this is utility (can they carve a piece of the market away from ERC20 or BSC)? If they can find a niche to attract users/developers, then they might make it, but there are so many layers-1 on the market today it's a bit ridiculous. Show Less
3
