The interesting aspect of SCOR Protocol's tokenomics design lies in its fee distribution mechanism—dividing the fees into three directions: community, burn, and treasury. This is not just a hype-driven airdrop stunt to generate temporary buzz, but a systematic structural design. Its logical chain is very clear: stimulating demand through multi-channel fee mechanisms, creating scarcity on the supply side, and simultaneously strengthening treasury support. This long-term oriented token design reflects deeper project thinking better than simply pursuing short-term speculation.
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.
9 Likes
Reward
9
3
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
0xOverleveraged
· 14h ago
Speaking of which, these three distribution methods are indeed more reliable than projects that constantly airdrop. The combination of burning and vaults is quite clever.
View OriginalReply0
FunGibleTom
· 14h ago
Really? The three-way allocation looks fine, but it depends on whether it can actually be executed properly later on.
View OriginalReply0
NotFinancialAdvice
· 14h ago
The three-way allocation scheme is indeed not new, but the key is whether it can really be implemented or not; otherwise, it's just armchair strategizing.
The interesting aspect of SCOR Protocol's tokenomics design lies in its fee distribution mechanism—dividing the fees into three directions: community, burn, and treasury. This is not just a hype-driven airdrop stunt to generate temporary buzz, but a systematic structural design. Its logical chain is very clear: stimulating demand through multi-channel fee mechanisms, creating scarcity on the supply side, and simultaneously strengthening treasury support. This long-term oriented token design reflects deeper project thinking better than simply pursuing short-term speculation.