RE: The Need For Resource Credits Will Push The Price Of Hive
You are viewing a single comment's thread:
The main reason Hive is leaving exchanges is HBD. 2% of the hive supply has been burned in under 10 days.
Considering a lot of hive is powered up, the reduction of liquid hive is huge.
The next report on how much hive is leaving exchanges will show a massive drop.
0
0
0.000
That is interesting.
What is causing the burn?
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
First there is the HBD proposal converting hive to HBD which is then in the DAO, so out of circulation. It's around 5,000 hive an hour being burned.
Also, there's is a 5% burn fee on every hive to HBD conversion. 4 million hive were converted today only so that's a big burn.
That's a mistake on my part, most of it was simply converted to HBD. So the biggest part is not burned, it was just converted into HBD debt.
When HBD dumps in the future, it will be converted to hive again (hopefully not more hive), but meanwhile, it can cause a hive shortage.
Ah okay. I follow what you are saying.
To me, the key is just get the growth on Hive. That will solve a great many issues. Token burns are nice but they are often done in lieu of solving the underlying problem: no growth.
We see a lot happening that will bring a great many people to Hive I believe. So we just need to keep pushing things further along until the numbers show up requiring Resource Credits.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
Yes, I agree. Activity and resource credits are the main feature. Although they're not that different.
In order to be valuable, there are basically two models.
1- Burns: similar to stock buybacks.
2- Resource credits: Similar to stock dividends.
Both return value to shareholders and without this all is speculation. This is true for every crypto.
The Spk network SIP is basically locked liquidity, which is a form of burning. Similarly, the Hive DAO is locked liquidity, which can only be released by governance voting. So when I say "burned", it's not technically correct, it's just locked in the DAO in the form of HBD.
Bitcoin as the best store of value and Eth as the best collateral are both speculations imo. People speculate that those assets will be bought and held for their better security. I have nothing against speculation, and hold both BTC and ETH as I agree, but in order to have intrinsic value, we need buybacks or dividends.
Eth has buybacks, Hive has dividends. Bitcoin has dividends in the form of fees as well, but only the miners can earn them, not every bitcoin holder. Time will tell if this is a flawed model or not.
There is, of course, the "network effect value". Some people believe that the more users there are, the more valuable a token, even if it doesn't capture value in the form of burns or dividends. I don't think that this can hold true in the long run.
Also important to add, Proof of Brain is a form of dividend and burn at the same time.
Hive power is locked liquidity (temporary burn), and it allows you to allocate inflation (upvotes are like a dividend).
Someone might argue that governance gives value without being a burn or a dividend. But I disagree, because if I own 51% of the governance token, I can decide to allocate myself a revenue stream in the form of inflation.
A more practical example would be uniswap governance choosing to earn from the exchange fees. It's always about burn or dividend.
The token "burns" (moreso getting locked into HBD) are a consequence of growth in demand for HBD.
That demand may be purely speculative, but it is real money coming into the system and token burns are a way to ensure that money is locked in for long term Hive investors, not just dumped by the next HBD speculator.
Not strictly being burned, most is just converted to HBD and still in virtual supply. A small percentage is burned, and a small percentage of the HBD is itself locked in the DHF.