A common pattern in the crypto space: most protocols opt for token buybacks and market observation rather than implementing burn mechanisms. The preference reveals interesting incentive structures within projects—buybacks maintain flexibility while burns represent a more permanent commitment. Worth watching how different approaches play out over time.

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
  • Reward
  • 4
  • Repost
  • Share
Comment
0/400
TestnetScholarvip
· 4h ago
What does it matter if you buy it back? In the end, it can't escape the curse of inflation. Burning coins is the real ruthless move.
View OriginalReply0
OnlyOnMainnetvip
· 20h ago
Buying back is more flexible than destroying, but can this really hold the price in the long term? It feels like just a delaying tactic.
View OriginalReply0
ForkTonguevip
· 20h ago
Repurchase is to have a backup plan, in case the price falls, you can change your mind. Burning is what really takes courage.
View OriginalReply0
SelfRuggervip
· 20h ago
Buying back is smarter than destroying Satoshi, anyway it's just a trick to play people for suckers, just a different way of doing it.
View OriginalReply0
  • Pin
Trade Crypto Anywhere Anytime
qrCode
Scan to download Gate App
Community
  • 简体中文
  • English
  • Tiếng Việt
  • 繁體中文
  • Español
  • Русский
  • Français (Afrique)
  • Português (Portugal)
  • Bahasa Indonesia
  • 日本語
  • بالعربية
  • Українська
  • Português (Brasil)