Many people believe that token incentives can sustain a protocol's revenue, but this logic has long been disproven by practice. In the short term, it may seem vibrant, with various liquidity mining and yield farming pushing the data to be very hot, and lock-up volumes soaring. But once the incentives weaken or stop, these false booms immediately reveal their true nature—users leave faster than anyone, trading volume halves, and the actual protocol revenue quickly becomes exposed and dies.



The fundamental reason is clear: token incentives attract arbitrageurs, not genuine users. They come solely to claim incentives, and once the returns decline, they immediately turn away, showing no real recognition of the protocol's value. Such superficial prosperity is as thin as paper.

Protocols that truly survive rely on solid functional needs and usage value. You need to make users feel that using your product itself is meaningful, not just because of token rewards. This is the true foundation for sustaining protocol revenue in the long run. Relying solely on incentives is destined to go nowhere.
View Original
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
  • 5
  • Repost
  • Share
Comment
0/400
WhaleInTrainingvip
· 01-07 06:18
It's the same old story again, but it really hits home. Token incentives are just a quick fix; who can't see through that? I've seen too many projects over the years, and as soon as the incentives stop, they become irrelevant. Truly valuable products don't need such effort; users will come on their own.
View OriginalReply0
blockBoyvip
· 01-07 06:09
That's why all those liquidity mining projects are dead now. As soon as the incentives stop, people run away. I really look down on this short-sighted design.
View OriginalReply0
GweiWatchervip
· 01-04 06:53
Once the army of arbitrageurs withdraws, their underwear immediately shows. This was obvious from the start. When incentives stop, users leave, which shows that no one truly believes in your protocol. I've said it before: projects that burn money on incentives are doomed to fail eventually. Yet, so many projects are still jumping into the pit. The problem is most founders only care about short-term data and ignore what happens afterward. Protocols with genuine functionality can indeed retain users, but building real features is very difficult; burning money is much easier. If this continues, it will be heartbreaking, and we'll see a wave of project teams resorting to all kinds of desperate measures.
View OriginalReply0
bridge_anxietyvip
· 01-04 06:53
To be honest, this is just a replica of those collapse projects from last year, only with a different name and repeated explanations. Once the incentives are gone, users disperse. Such a simple principle still needs to be repeatedly taught, which shows that the community really suffers from amnesia.
View OriginalReply0
FOMOmonstervip
· 01-04 06:51
Basically, it's just a game of hot potato, it should have died long ago. Once the incentives stop, the true nature is revealed. I've seen too many projects like this. Real functionality is the key; those who only throw coins are just fooling fools. I stopped touching this kind of project long ago, lessons learned the hard way. Arbitrageurs are like locusts; the protocol itself has no value and is useless.
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)