Utility versus Tokenomics as a driver of value...

Does that sound like an appropriate summary statement?

This porposal is complicated...

...but if I understand correctly...you are creating a business case or an additional use case for PolyCub and pHBD, and your supposition is that this use case would drive demand for these assets, because these use cases generate more of same asset, but over lockup time periods.

Which I suppose gets us past the traditional earn and dump activity, which drives down token price. But potentially leads to lock-up end period dumping, but does kick dumping down the road, and if the token values goes up significantly within that time period, people/investors may be relunctant to dump for fear of missing out on more appreciation.

Or this could feed collateralized loans, if investors need cash.

Thus the project adds a nother driver of value independent in some ways from pure tokenomics as a driver, and utility becomes a driver.

I need to read this again, a few more times to wrap my head around it and understand. But thats my first time through read summation.

Did I miss something?

Posted Using LeoFinance ^Beta