Proposal to Change ASTR Tokenomics to Fixed Supply

Economics
1

This proposal has been reviewed internally with team efforts. I’m sharing it here to invite feedback and improve it together with the community.

TL;DR

This proposal suggests the next advancement of Astar’s tokenomics, developed after careful consideration based on community and investor feedbacks:

  • Transition from dynamic inflation to a fixed maximum supply model.
  • Introduce gradual emission reduction while preserving dynamic staking incentives.
  • Establish Protocol-Owned Liquidity (POL) managed by the Astar Finance Committee (AFC) to independently secure Polkadot coretime slots.
  • Sustain dApp staking rewards, projecting a stable 11-14% maximum APR with bonus reward at 50% staking ratio within the upcoming 2 years.
  • Strengthen ASTR’s long-term economic value, resilience and independence.

Background

In August 2023, Astar introduced a dynamic tokenomics model, aligning emissions with real network participation while enhancing builder incentives and burn mechanisms to strengthen long-term sustainability.

Last month, Astar executed another update to its dynamic tokenomics parameters, further enhancing the network’s economic design by better aligning staking rewards with real network activity, stabilizing APRs, reducing unnecessary emissions, and lowering overall ASTR inflation.

Now, as the web3 landscape continues to evolve, Astar is proactively positioning itself to meet new strategic priorities and maintain its competitive edge, while supporting our broader initiatives to drive real-world Web3 adoption via Soneium and Japan:

  • Growing institutional interest favors networks with fixed-supply economic models offering long-term value stability.
  • Polkadot’s Agile Coretime shift requires parachains to self-finance coretime purchases through sustainable liquidity, enhancing the need for autonomous security mechanisms.
  • Builder incentives must remain attractive and predictable to drive continuous ecosystem expansion without overreliance on inflationary incentives.

It’s time for Astar to take the next bold step.

Introducing Astar’s New Tokenomics Design

This proposal outlines a strategic evolution of Astar’s tokenomics to build resilience, independence, and sustainable growth for the years ahead.

1. Fixed Supply: A Stronger Foundation

  • Total Supply: maximum supply at ~10.5 billion ASTR for 50% ideal staking ratio.
  • No future minting: Inflationary emissions will be phased out over time.

2. Emission Structure: Dynamic Participation, Gradual Decay

Emissions will continue to adjust dynamically based on staking participation, targeting a 50% network staking rate — but with a new decay function applied.

  • Emission Decay Formula: $ E(n) = E_0 \times (1 - r)^n $
    image

Where:

  • R = 0.000008%, which is emission decay factor per block

  • E0= 136.67, which is current baseline emission at 50% ideal staking ratio

  • Emissions decrease exponentially at a rate of 0.000008% per block.

  • After 1 year: ASTR dynamic emission per block will be ~81% of today’s dynamic emission at 50% ideal staking ratio.

  • After 2 years: ASTR dynamic emission per block will be ~65% of today’s dynamic emission at 50% ideal staking ratio.

    • $E(5,256,000) = E_0 \times (1 - 6 \times 10^{-8})^{5,256,000} \approx 0.656731$
      image

  • In the long term, total amount of ASTR emission after applying decay factor will converge to ~1.71B ASTR:

    • $C(n) = \frac{E_0}{r} (1 - e^{-rn})$
      image

    • $\lim_{n \to \infty} C(n) = \frac{E_0}{r} = \frac{136.67}{6 \times 10^{-8}} \approx 1.708 \times 10^9\ \text{ASTR}$
      image

    • Assuming deployment of new tokenomics happens in September 2026, with current ASTR supply of 8.4B and 39.37M emission from now to September 2026 considered, the maximum supply at 50% ideal staking ratio will be ~10.5B ASTR.

This smooth, exponential decay ensures rewards stay healthy for builders and validators, while naturally reducing emissions over time — balancing growth and sustainability.

3. dApp Staking Yield Projection

Builder rewards will continue, sourced from strategic reserves, ensuring stability during the transition.

Projected dApp staking APR (stakers):

  • Currently dApp staking rewards for stakers is around ~17% APR with bonus reward considered when staking ratio is around 50%.
  • Decreases gradually to ~13.8% APR in 1 year, to ~11% APR over 2 years.

This provides a predictable, attractive yield for builders — strengthening Astar’s ecosystem without over-dependence on inflation.

Protocol-Owned Liquidity (POL) by Astar Finance Committee (AFC)

Objective

  • Secure Polkadot coretime slots without relying on crowdloans and adapt into Polkadot new tokenomics.
  • Increase Astar’s financial independence and autonomous security.

Execution

  • Managed by: Astar Finance Committee (AFC).
  • Funding Sources:
    • 20% of network fees redirected to AFC for POL operations.
    • Expired/unclaimed staking rewards redirected.
    • Strategic use of reserve ASTR if needed.
  • Action Plan:
    • Acquire DOT using treasury or fee revenues.
    • Pair ASTR-DOT liquidity on selected platforms.
    • Self-stake DOT to secure coretime slots.
    • Reinvest POL yields back into ecosystem growth.
  • Transparency:
    • Monthly POL performance reports from AFC.
    • Public dashboard for liquidity and coretime metrics.

Additional Measures

Network Fees and Burn Mechanism

  • 50% of transaction fees burned permanently— reducing circulating supply over time.
  • 30% of fees allocated to collators.
  • 20% directed to ecosystem treasury for grants, POL funding and builder support.

Validator and Builder Incentives

  • Validators (collators) continue receiving dynamic emissions.
  • Builders are rewarded through sustainable dApp staking funded from reserves.

Overview: Current and Proposed Emissions and Allocations

Current (Post Tokenomics 2.0) Proposed (New Fixed Supply Model)
Annual Inflation Rate Dynamic (~4.32% baseline) Dynamic baseline, with emission decay (~65% of current emission after 2 years in Q3 2028)
Total ASTR Emitted per Block 136.67 ASTR Starts from dynamic baseline, gradually reduces
Total ASTR Emitted per Year 360,139,867 ASTR Decreases ~19% after the first year in Q3 2027, ~35% after the second year in Q3 2028
Allocated to Base Staker Rewards 10% (~22.16 ASTR/block) 10% (~17.95 ASTR/block in Q3 2027, ~14.40 ASTR/block after the in Q3 2028)
Allocated to Adjustable Stakers Part 55% (~58.50 ASTR/block) 55% (~47.63 ASTR/block in Q3 2027, ~38.03 ASTR/block after the in Q3 2028)
Allocated to Builders (dApp Staking) 25% (~34.17 ASTR/block) 25% (~27.68 ASTR/block in Q3 2027, ~22.21 ASTR/block after the in Q3 2028)
Allocated to Treasury and Collators 10% fixed 10% fixed
dApp Staking APY ~17% maximum APR depending on participation ~11-14% projected after emission decay in 2 years

Technical Implementation

  • Smart contract and runtime upgrades initiated by the Astar Foundation.
  • Changes include:
    • Supply lock activation.
    • Emission decay function.
    • Fee burn mechanism update.
    • POL liquidity management integration with AFC.

Roadmap

While this is a temp check with the Astar collective, the implementation roadmap would like as follows:

  • [2025-04] - Temp check
  • [2025-05] - Start of the concept building of new tokenomics
  • [2025-07] - Share design sketch with Astar Collective and further finetune
  • [2025-10] - Implement in a revamp of our tokenomics
  • [2025-11] - Added tokenomics specialists to our project, including budget allocation.
  • [2026-02] - Showcase the complete research & design that has been done around Astar new tokenomics 3.0
  • [2026-03] - Technical Implementation starts
  • [2026-04] - Deployment on testnet, including audit start
  • [2026-05] - Audit completion
  • [2026-06] - Set parameters and deploy on Astar & Shiden

Closing

Through the adoption of fixed supply discipline, dynamic yet decaying emissions, AFC-managed liquidity strategies, and sustainable builder support, Astar will enter a new era of security, predictability, and resilience with fixed token supply.

This is about more than tokenomics.

It’s about future-proofing Astar’s economy — making it resilient, self-sufficient, and positioned for long-term success.

Together, we can future-proof Astar’s economy and ecosystem.

15 Likes
2

Thank you.
I too am concerned about the inflation rate and was going to suggest improvements depending on Astar Evolution Phase2.

I think this proposal is very effective in terms of the asset value of ASTRs, as it is a major recommendation to reduce the selling pressure that many ASTR holders are concerned about.

However, since the amount of inflation will fluctuate quite significantly, dApp Staking and collator compensation will also decrease, which may cause sustainability issues. For example, if the price of ASTRs is not 8 times the current price in 10 years, the amount of rewards in legal tender will decrease. Theoretically, the price of the ASTR would have to increase 1.25 times each year to sustain the rewards.

What are your thoughts on this point?

*For reference, I created a graph, albeit a very crude one(x-axis is year).

image
image894×542 14.4 KB

image
image901×549 14.4 KB

4 Likes
3

I agree with @you425 san’s concerns.
As time passes, it seems that the significance of Dapp Staking for Dapp Stakers lies solely in governance participation, with economic rationality diminishing.
If this proposal passes, I will explore ways to increase ASTR without relying on Dapp Staking.

also, The value increase of Neemo’s nsAstr depends on Dapp Staking rewards, and I predict it may negatively impact dApps like Neemo, which currently enjoy high prestige.

1 Like
4

Thank you both @you425 @AstarPunks for your thoughtful input — they’re much appreciated.

On the long-term sustainability of dApp staking and collator rewards: you’re absolutely right that as emissions gradually decrease, the real-yield incentive may diminish unless ASTR’s value increases over time. This proposal is not intended to directly drive price growth, but rather to create the conditions that support and sustain future growth by reducing unnecessary sell pressure and aligning long-term incentives.

Regarding collators, it’s worth noting that in Astar’s architecture (as in Polkadot’s), collators do not directly contribute to the core security of the network — that role is handled by the Polkadot relay chain validators. Collators are only responsible for block production and transaction inclusion, so a gradual reduction in emissions does not compromise network safety or liveness, as we’ve already secured commitments from key partners to continue operating collators even under the updated reward structure.

That said, decentralization of collators remains important. If we see clear signs of declining participation or increased centralization among collators, the Astar Finance Committee (AFC) may allocate additional support to ensure a healthy and decentralized network through a non-inflationary approach.

We also recognize that the role of dApp staking may shift over time — with governance participation becoming more central than pure yield. This opens up space to explore new mechanisms that support long-term engagement and ASTR utility.

Thanks again for raising the valuable points. We look forward to continuing the conversation and refining the model together.

2 Likes
5

Hi @Mingshi , thanks for the proposal, great to read the details.

I think most of the dApp stakers would be very interested in below

and would the resource for dApp stakers be the same as builders, i.e., from the strategic reserves ?

6

Really impressed with the direction this proposal is taking. It’s clear that a lot of care went into balancing sustainability with practical incentives for builders and stakers.

The proactive approach here shows real leadership — especially in anticipating where the broader ecosystem is heading and taking steps now to meet those future needs. Excited to see how this evolves and contributes to Astar’s long-term strength.

Also great point from You!

1 Like
7

@Mingshi san
Thank you for your response.

Regarding your proposal to support and sustain future growth, I understand it aims to meet certain conditions.
However, with APR gradually decreasing in Dapp Staking, it’s unlikely that many will participate solely to gain governance voting rights.
It feels almost nonexistent.

I’m concerned that this could lead to the collapse of Dapp Staking, with governance conducted by a limited few (likely the Core team, Foundation, Agents, or Companies), ultimately risking Astar’s collapse.
This is because an Astar without many Dapp Stakers would lose its role as a public blockchain supporting developers.

As for Neemo, everyone participates seeking profit. The Neemo dApp is likely to collapse. Who would join a DeFi with gradually decreasing returns year by year?
Currently, Neemo has the highest staking volume among dApps. If even that collapses, what will remain in the Astar ecosystem?

I am a Dapp Staker and a Neemo user. I feel I have nowhere to turn.

8

Thank you @Mingshi for all of the hard work and the proposal. Overall I support the fix amount of Astar, and I also think about the potential issue like the dApp staking reward may decrease over time due to the reduced emission, which is a natural consequence of aiming for long-term sustainability. Correct me if I am wrong, I thought about the following possible way for dApp staking part:

  1. Right now, we had the ACS on Soneium, which used the TVL and other metrics for different dApp, which might be a good metrics for the overall reward as well on Astar dApp staking, we can also evaluate the amount of Astar staked and also the TVL, amount of users, and other metrics of the dApp itself as metric, so that the project that is doing super well would still get enough reward
  2. The staking APR can also be dynamics like based on number of users, transactions, and others, so that means the Astar stakers should carefully select which dApp to support, the reward might be decreased if they support dApp that is not active
  3. Just like ACS, maybe we can also had bonus reward each season for the dApp staking and support the developers to build and also the stakers
  4. Find out more ways to buy back the Astar, and bring more value to Astar token
1 Like
9

I’m truly excited about this new chapter for the ASTR token. The recent update to Astar’s tokenomics reflects a thoughtful alignment with both community feedback and the long-term sustainability of the ecosystem. Adjusting the inflation rate is a crucial step toward protecting token value for holders, especially in an environment that is inherently inflationary due to mechanisms like dApp Staking.

The reduction in APR and the move toward fixing the token supply are strong indicators of maturity in protocol design. These decisions mark significant progress toward a more resilient and value-driven network.

Regarding the APR reduction, I would like to highlight point (2) of the dApp Staking Code of Conduct, which clearly states:

“dApp Staking is not a funding mechanism or charity program. Projects must be self-sustaining regardless of staking rewards.” (https://docs.astar.network/docs/use/dapp-staking/code-of-conduct/)

In this context, “self-sufficiency” means that while dApp Staking serves as a tool to bootstrap and support early-stage development, it must not become the primary source of long-term revenue. Projects are expected to find viable, sustainable business models beyond staking incentives. If additional funding is needed, it should be pursued through alternative avenues.

This shift calls for builders to explore economically sustainable strategies, and for holders to understand that APR comes at the cost of inflation. Lower APR means lower inflation — and, consequently, stronger potential for token value appreciation.

The overall sentiment I’ve gathered from the community has been overwhelmingly positive. This update demonstrates that Astar is listening, adapting, and paving the way for a healthier and more valuable ecosystem.

2 Likes
10

@pitcoin777 san
Thank you for your response.
I agree that adjusting the inflation rate is a wonderful improvement.

However, as @DrCao san has pointed out, I naturally have concerns about sustainability.

I also think about the potential issue like the dApp staking reward may decrease over time due to the reduced emission, which is a natural consequence of aiming for long-term sustainability.

pitcoin777 san, you have frequently cited the following code of conduct, and I understand it well:

“dApp Staking is not a funding mechanism or charity program. Projects must be self-sustaining regardless of staking rewards.”

If that’s the case, why have dApps like Neemo, which rely on Dapp Staking rewards as a source for token value mechanisms, repeatedly been listed in the past?
It feels like there’s an issue with the listing evaluation criteria when a dApp is listed, supported by the community, and then later deemed to be incorrect. What are your thoughts on this?
I believe this is not a problem with the dApps themselves but rather an issue with the listing evaluation criteria, which is a problem on Astar’s side.

To add to this, I recognize Astar as a public blockchain whose value lies in solving the developer incentive design that Nakamoto Satoshi couldn’t address.
If Dapp Staking is not a funding mechanism for developers, then what exactly is Astar’s value proposition?

I believe Astar’s ideal role is to support exceptional developers like the anonymous Nakamoto Satoshi, without relying on corporate funding, to grow the ecosystem and drive economic development.

image
image1002×371 65.4 KB

11

Thank you for your thoughtful response.

Yes, I understand that intent.
What’s important here is that ASTR stakeholders have different perspectives.

From the standpoint of “not harming the token’s value,” this proposal is indeed positive.
However, since it effectively represents a phased discontinuation of dApp Staking, there are also negative implications for both stakers and developers.

For stakers—who are also holders—reducing sell pressure is certainly beneficial.
That said, this requires a mindset shift from income gain to capital gain, and for that shift to be successful, it must be accompanied by policies that drive real demand for ASTR.
This proposal does not sufficiently provide that.
If demand growth is not addressed in parallel, we may see stakers begin to abandon ASTR.

It’s possible that Astar Evolution Phase 2 could address these concerns, but since its contents remain unknown, we’re left in a speculative state for now.

For developers, the situation is more clear-cut:
they lose rewards, and the current dApp Staking structure is one of the few differentiators Astar has compared to other chains.
While some community members argue that dApp Staking has not contributed to ecosystem growth, if the community accepts this view, then perhaps this change is inevitable.

While I understand that Astar, as a Parachain, does not require extensive collator decentralization, the current proposal guarantees that collator operation will become economically unsustainable over time.
Although AFC may intervene with support, this is overly optimistic without a clearly defined, sustainable funding source to back it up.

However, since governance participation is already open even without dApp Staking, this argument doesn’t strongly support the shift.
Unfortunately, as seen not only in Astar but across many chains, most users have little interest in governance.

To address this, Arbitrum is one example: it proposed a system where users can stake ARB to earn yield while participating in governance.
If there’s no yield, people won’t participate—and that can weaken governance, making it more vulnerable to manipulation.
That’s not something we can afford to take lightly.

Sustainability Proposal

With all this in mind, I propose introducing a floor for inflation reduction.
Following the trajectory proposed so far, but once the inflation rate reaches a base level, reductions would stop.

image
image900×551 12.3 KB

image
image912×557 14.4 KB

In this simulation, inflation declines from a base rate of 4.32% to 0.5%, equivalent to Ethereum’s level.
At that point (approximately year 10–11), inflation stabilizes.

The total issuance remains constant, so the relative inflation rate continues to decline over time.
If ASTR’s price were to grow about 7x to $0.21 by that time, users would see the same yield in USD terms as they do now.

That’s not an unrealistic goal.

2 Likes
12

I agree with most of @you425 san’s comments, but am against following the current proposed trajectory.
Instead of parameter adjustments, I would like to see a fundamental review, taking into account the points raised by @DrCAO san.
Why not explore a way to adjust the inflation rate while maintaining Dapp Staker’s APR and developer support?
Is this an impossible proposal?

13

Thanks for the detailed proposal.

As an LST protocol building on top of Astar’s dApp Staking, we (Astake) acknowledge that any adjustment to staking APR - such as the projected gradual decline - will have a direct impact on Astake’s base yield.

However, we fully agree with you by

and believe this change is beneficial for the long-term sustainability and value of the Astar network, which in turn can support broader ecosystem growth and help mitigate the pressure from APR reductions.

It’s also important to emphasize that our LST projects (and Neemo, Algem, etc.) are not solely built around dApp Staking yields. Our broader goal is to attract more users and capital to the ecosystem. We’ve already laid solid groundwork in the Soneium ecosystem with use cases, and users will be able to further amplify their yield from dApp Staking through strategies such as leveraged farming with $wstASTR.

In short, we fully support the direction Astar is heading. And should any adjustments be needed on our side, we are well prepared to evolve with the ecosystem.

4 Likes
14

Hello everyone!
I’m really happy to see proposals like this aimed at improving the long-term sustainability of the $ASTR token and its tokenomics. I believe this initiative is extremely important to bring another key upgrade to our tokenomics, making it even more sustainable, stronger, and more attractive to external entities, including institutions.

This move also seems well aligned with Soneium’s strategies and vision for expansion, and it’s truly encouraging to see how the Astar team has already started a restructuring path with a long-term vision to grow alongside Soneium.

I think many pieces of the puzzle will become clearer once Astar Evolution Phase 2 is released, which, for now, has intentionally not been disclosed due to strategic and legal reasons.

1 – Inflation reduction and APR cuts for stakers:

Honestly, I don’t think this is a major issue. Astar has offered incredibly high yields compared to many other ecosystems. Even with the adjustments in Tokenomics 3.0, I believe staking rewards will remain solid and aligned with what we see in other well-established Web3 projects.

2 – About the concern that LS protocols like Neemo, Algem, Astake, Omni, etc. might become less attractive:

I don’t really agree with that. I think the attractiveness of Liquid Staking doesn’t depend on how high the APR from native dApp staking is.

Liquid Staking is interesting because of how it works:
you can stake your tokens (and earn the same rewards as native dApp staking), but you also get a liquid token in return and you can use that token in DeFi to earn even more rewards.

So whether the native dApp staking APR is 17% or 11%, it doesn’t really change the value of Liquid Staking.
In fact, I believe that if the APR drops, many users who were previously happy with just native dApp staking (because the rewards were high) might now start using Liquid Staking protocols to optimize their yields and earn more.

3 – One doubt I have (just a personal thought, not based on data):

Right now, our tokenomics is quite INFLATION-CENTRIC: inflation funds everything, from collators to dApp staking (stakers & builders) and more.
But if we’re aiming to reduce inflation to 0 (or near zero) in the future, can the ecosystem remain sustainable?
Will we be able to generate enough revenue from gas fees, AFC performance, and other sources to fund everything and continue evolving?

For that to work, we’ll need huge onchain activity and adoption. Right now, ASTR token is building its strength on Soneium, and the big user/adoption push seems will likely happen there.

Of course, I’m saying all this without knowing the content of Astar Evolution Phase 2.
As I mentioned earlier, since I’m missing a key piece of the puzzle, it’s probably hard for me to fully grasp the bigger picture and understand the entire long-term plan in its full depth.

Just wanted to share my thoughts and hear your opinions as well.

3 Likes
15

Thank you for your contributions, but I didn’t quite understand your point — could you elaborate further?

In the case of reducing rewards and the percentage allocated to native staking, there will also be a reduction in liquid staking. The entire network will be adjusted according to the new parameters — and that’s how it’s going to be.

I don’t see a problem with that. In fact, even liquid staking protocols will need to develop new revenue streams instead of relying solely on dApp staking to sustain their operations.

It’s worth remembering that ASTR is entering new horizons.
Past paradigms no longer apply today.

New programs are being structured — such as the Ambassador Program, the dApp Staking Program, and the UCG Program. Committees are being established, including the Astar Finance Committee (AFC) and Astar Community Council (ACC). There’s also strategic alignment with Soneium and Ethereum L1.

16

@pitcoin777 san

Thank you for your reply.

I apologize for the incomplete and insufficient citation.

Below is the full text of the Code of Conduct you referenced.

dApp staking is not a fundraising mechanism or charity program. Projects must be self-sustaining, with or without staking rewards.
Self-sustaining means that dApp staking supports project launch and development, but should not be the long-term primary source of income. Projects must be viable without staking rewards. If additional funding is required, it must be secured from other sources.

My understanding is that if we adhere to the dApp Staking Code of Conduct, dApp staking is meant to support project launch and development, and should not be used to increase the token value of the project itself. This is my question.

Currently, projects such as Neemo, Astake, and Algem appear to be allowed to do so. However, due to changes in Astar’s tokenomics, project participants are about to face a reduction in the base yield they were expecting.

Some may suggest using techniques such as leverage farming, but I hope you understand that some users considered such techniques risky and relied solely on Neemo’s nsAstar base yield.

I understand that Astar is moving to a new stage with its partnership with Soneium, but as an early Astar fan, this proposal is unbearable to me if it means losing its original role as a public blockchain for developer support.

I regret bringing up the topic of Neemo and digressing into a discussion of other dApps.

The fundamental issue is the sustainability of dApp staking.

Some may argue that if dApp staking yields fall, users will be able to migrate to other methods. But as @you425 san already pointed out, this could lead to fewer dApp stakers, worse governance, Loss of developer support functionality, and even a takeover of Astar.

1 Like
17

@Mingshi
Thank you for the proposal, Mingshi.

Is the suggestion to impose a supply cap on the $ASTR simply a measure to enhance its scarcity?

Or is it because Astar’s strategy is to align with Soneium, and you judged that having a cap would be preferable for collaboration with Soneium?

I personally support imposing a cap on the $ASTR token supply to increase its scarcity, but since the trade-off could impact the sustainability of dApp Staking, I would like additional information to inform the decision.

18

dApp staking is not a guaranteed basic income — projects need to understand this.

To remain on the list, they must build a supportive community and be fully aligned with the Code of Conduct, or at the very least, be making every effort to get on the same page.

Yes… all dApps will see their earnings reduced, and operations will need to adapt.
The purpose of liquid staking is not to provide high yields at the cost of ASTR inflation, but to keep users liquid so they can explore DeFi utilities and increase their yield that way.
With high inflation, the yield comes from the community itself — the user earns and loses at the same time.

That’s not the purpose of liquid staking — and to be honest, it’s not the purpose of DeFi either.
If you want returns, you need to take risks.

In short, Astar has been treated like a cash cow by both users and builders since day one — but new directions are being taken.
It’s no longer enough to stake, forget about it, and passively earn rewards from inflation.
Staking remains important and is being adjusted to ensure fair compensation, but to earn meaningful returns, users need to be active in the ecosystem and engage with DeFi, gaming, and more.

2 Likes
19

@pitcon777 san

Thank you for answering my questions.

I understand and agree with all of your answers.

Thank you for your excellent answer.

The only remaining concern I have is the sustainability issue of Dapp Staking that I have already mentioned.

20

The proposal is very good, in terms of guaranteeing a fixed supply is a game changer, added to this deflationary systems will help to balance the ecosystem.

Having an infinite supply is equal to having a continuous inflation, so this is a great move.

On the other hand, the fact that the protocol can have its own liquidity opens the door to better management of funds, which can be directed to truly effective causes, preventing mismanagement.

Finally, having an RPA gives a better vision for both builders and users to plan their strategies.

All in all, it has been a great decision, I think this dissipates the “uncertainty” and generates “confidence in the ecosystem”, which is what we need to attract more builders and users.