The Burndrop Explained: A Speculative Vision — and Why ASTR Will Eventually Pump

[Poggi_Luca]

Disclaimer

This post reflects my personal and speculative view regarding the Astar Burndrop mechanism. It may contain inaccuracies or assumptions that could play out differently in reality. This is not financial advice. Everyone is strongly encouraged to do their own research and form independent conclusions.

---

TL;DR

• The Burndrop creates a one-way capital flow into ASTR: users must acquire ASTR to participate, and once committed it cannot be sold back because it is permanently burned.

• Burning ASTR reduces circulating supply without extracting capital, creating structural supply reduction alongside capital inflow (Economic Principle 1).

• Unlike traditional airdrops, the Burndrop prevents capital from flowing back out through ASTR, shifting profit realization and volatility entirely to the token offered via Burndrop.

• Each Burndrop introduces a deliberate and engineered arbitrage opportunity between Astar’s valuation and the implied value of the token allocation distributed via Burndrop (Economic Principle 2).

• This arbitrage explains why capital is incentivized to enter ASTR, while the burn mechanism explains how that capital is structurally captured.

• Arbitrage opportunities tend to close rapidly, driving a fast alignment of valuations.

• Because Burndrops can occur multiple times, these effects form a repeatable flywheel: projects launch, tokens are allocated to Astar, Burndrops route capital into ASTR, supply reduces, and the cycle repeats.

---

Introduction

GM Astar community

I decided to take some time to write this post. As the title suggests, it contains my speculative interpretation of the Burndrop mechanism and its potential implications for ASTR, especially for its market price.

I did this for three main reasons:

1. Over the past months, while following the discussion about Astar Evolution Phase 2, I noticed that almost nobody in the community has explored the speculative link between the Burndrop mechanism and ASTR valuation. It seems that this possibility has gone largely unnoticed — or at least not consciously priced in by most participants — and in my opinion this lack of awareness is also reflected in ASTR’s price action.

2. While the recently launched Burndrop PoC is an important experiment — useful to showcase the process to the community, test the mechanics, identify potential vulnerabilities, and gather feedback — it is not meant to replicate real economic behavior. For obvious economic reasons, the Burndrop PoC cannot simulate the actual dynamics of a real Burndrop: no real token is distributed, only an NFT-based participation passport, which will likely provide benefits in the future events. As a result, it is perfectly normal that the PoC does not capture the true economic incentives and behaviors that will emerge during real Burndrops.

3. The Astar team cannot realistically publish a post like this one. Due to their role and responsibilities, they do not have the freedom to openly speculate on price dynamics or second-order market effects. Since I am not part of the team, I decided to voluntarily take on this role and share my thoughts with the community.

Think of this post as my Christmas gift to the Astar community. I hope it provides interesting perspectives and helps you reason independently about the Burndrop mechanism. Feel free to comment below — feedback, criticism, and alternative views are more than welcome.

---

Assumptions

To keep this post focused, I assume that readers are already familiar with the Burndrop mechanism and related dynamics.

If not, I recommend reading the official explanatory posts linked above. There is also an opportunity to test the Burndrop mechanism by participating in the Burndrop PoC during these days.

What follows is my speculative analysis, built on two economic principles supported by simple mathematical reasoning.

---

Economic Principle 1 — Capital Absorption & Supply Reduction

Definition

All capital that enters the Burndrop cannot exit the system through ASTR, and the ASTR committed is permanently removed from circulation, resulting in structural supply reduction.

Explanation

• To participate in the Burndrop, users must buy ASTR (or must hold ASTR — the point remains the same, as those tokens were acquired at a cost).

• Once ASTR is committed to the Burndrop, it cannot be sold back on the market because it is necessarily burned: no capital is removed from the system, in addition to that, the token supply decreases.

In other words: capital flows into ASTR, BUT capital does NOT flow out of ASTR through the Burndrop.

Double Positive Effect

This mechanism has a dual impact:

1. Capital inflow: Users buy ASTR to participate.

2. Supply reduction: Burning ASTR reduces circulating supply.

Even if no new fresh capital joins the system, a reduction in supply creates a structurally positive long-term effect on ASTR.

Burndrop vs Traditional Airdrop

This is also where the Burndrop differs substantially from a traditional airdrop.

In a classic airdrop, users typically receive tokens for holding or using a protocol, without any permanent constraint on the asset that granted them eligibility. After receiving the airdrop, participants are generally free to sell both the airdropped token and the original token they used to qualify, often immediately and on the open market.

With the Burndrop, this dynamic is fundamentally different. The token used to participate (ASTR) cannot be sold afterward, because it is permanently burned as part of the mechanism. As a result, the value exchange is not reversible: capital enters through ASTR, but any potential exit shifts entirely to the third-party Startale ecosystem token distributed via the Burndrop.

This distinction is crucial. While an airdrop allows capital to flow back out through the original asset, the Burndrop enforces a one-way capital flow into ASTR, making it a structurally different — and economically much stronger — mechanism.

This framing describes a structural and incentive-driven effect, not an adversarial one: no value is extracted unfairly, but rather routed by design through rational participant behavior.

The Burndrop is effectively a self-imposed behavioral constraint from the Astar community itself: users must act in a specific way to obtain a third-party Startale ecosystem token — tokens that, arguably, the Astar community deserves due to its historical and continued support of the Startale ecosystem. This self-imposed constraint, often referred to as a form of Proof of Conviction, is the mechanism through which this value is structurally captured by the ASTR token.

ASTR as a Capital Routing Layer

ASTR behaves as a capital routing layer with respect to the token offered in the Burndrop:

• You inject capital into ASTR to gain access to third-party Startale ecosystem tokens.

• Your ability to realize profit (buy low / sell high) shifts entirely to a third-party Startale ecosystem token, not ASTR.

• Any selling pressure affects a third-party Startale ecosystem token’s liquidity, while ASTR remains insulated.

Startale or a project by offering tokens via the Burndrop is effectively bearing this cost by redirecting part of its own token supply to Burndrop participants. I will not go deeper here into why these two subjects are willing to allocate third-party Startale ecosystem tokens to the Burndrop: the former could have a precise business plan focused on ASTR token, while the latter could use it as a way to reward the Astar community for long-term support, ACS campaign, and ecosystem alignment.

---

Economic Principle 2 — Arbitrage Opportunity & Valuations Alignment

Definition

The Burndrop creates a deliberate and engineered arbitrage opportunity between Astar’s valuation and the implied value of the token allocation distributed via Burndrop, which, once identified and exploited, drives a rapid alignment of valuations.

Numerical Example (Hypothetical but Realistic)

To explain this principle, I will use the following numerical example. The key takeaway from this example is that the logic remains valid even if the implied value of the token allocation distributed via Burndrop is significantly higher or lower: what matters is the relative value linkage created between Astar and the token distributed via Burndrop, not the absolute numbers of this example.

Let’s assume the following illustrative scenario involving a hypothetical third-party Startale ecosystem token distributed via Burndrop:

• A strategic partnership between Startale (and Astar) and a major global Web2 technology company to build a proprietary consumer-focused L2

• No hard cap on participation per single address, only a time constraint (a deliberate design choice, as imposing participation limits would not make sense in a decentralized and permissionless system)

• Clear rules: tokenomics, lock-up, vesting schedules, distribution mechanics, etc.

At some point, the third-party Startale ecosystem token will have an implied valuation:

• If the token is not listed in the market yet: the parameter to consider is the FDV (Fully Diluted Value) and it is based on pre-market price and community expectations

• If the token is already listed in the market: the parameter to consider is the market capitalization and it is based on post-listing price and real price discovery

Instead for ASTR token, the parameter to be considered is the market capitalization, because you can participate in the Burndrop only with the circulating supply (and not future emissions of tokens): let’s consider ASTR market capitalization of $100M (based on actual price).

Please note that in both cases the absolute number of tokens is not the relevant variable in this example. What matters is the aggregate valuation (FDV or market capitalization), as we are reasoning in terms of total value rather than token-level quantities.

Just for simplicity, let’s assume:

• The third-party Startale ecosystem token is not listed in the market at the moment of Burndrop (but please consider that the economic principle remains valid also if the token is already listed in the market)

• The third-party Startale ecosystem token has a FDV of $2B, widely recognized by the community (reasonable for a major consumer-brand-backed L2)

• The Third-party Startale ecosystem supply allocation to Astar via Burndrop: 10% of total token supply

• Let’s make a simple calculation: $2B × 10% = $200M is the value allocated to Astar via Burndrop

The Arbitrage Effect

Scenario A: the entire (100%) ASTR circulating supply can be used in the Burndrop

$200M : $100M → 2 : 1 → in simple terms: you are giving 100M USD in order to receive 200M USD → translated: you are committing in the Burndrop 100M USD equivalent in ASTR tokens, in order to receive 200M USD equivalent in third-party Startale ecosystem token → HUGE MARKET INEFFICIENCY

And like any other market inefficiency, this will be exploited rapidly until its exhaustion which corresponds to ASTR market capitalization in reaching $200M with a 2x of increment for ASTR price.

And which will be the subjects responsible for the exploitation?

• Any subject that want to get their hands on the third-party Startale ecosystem token and Burndrop is the only way (or best way due to arbitrage opportunity) to acquire that token

• Any subjects that does not care about third-party Startale ecosystem token but want only to capture the profit of the arbitrage opportunity

Both of them have one thing in common: they need ASTR tokens to participate in the Burndrop and the only way is to purchase them in the market. This specific action brings to complete exhaustion of arbitrage opportunity which corresponds to valuations alignment.

Now, let’s consider another scenario.

Scenario B: only a portion (50%) of the entire ASTR circulating supply can be used in the Burndrop by setting a maximum amount of ASTR token and use a first-come first-served approach or a whitelisted approach based on Burndrop PoC participation

$200M : $50M ($100M x 50%) → 4 : 1 → in simple terms: you are giving 50M USD in order to receive 200M USD → translated: you are committing in the Burndrop 50M USD equivalent in ASTR tokens, in order to receive 200M USD equivalent in third-party Startale ecosystem token → HUGE MARKET INEFFICIENCY → alignment completed with a 4x of increment for ASTR price.

We could go on indefinitely by exploring many different possible scenarios, and I will leave this exercise to the reader. What I wanted to demonstrate is that the Astar Foundation has the ability to define these parameters by design, and therefore to directly influence the magnitude of the arbitrage opportunity.

---

Economic Principle 2 explains why capital is incentivized to enter the system in the first place: beyond the intrinsic interest in participating in the Burndrop, the engineered arbitrage provides an additional and powerful motivation. Whenever such arbitrage exists, rational market participants will exploit it.

Economic Principle 1 , instead, describes what happens to that capital once it enters the system: through burning and supply reduction, it becomes structurally locked into ASTR.

Together, these two principles explain both the cause of capital inflow and its structural capture by the ASTR token.

---

Strategic Context

There is a strong joint force between Astar and Startale:

• Astar: community, liquidity, treasury → new project activation
• Startale: team, developers, infrastructure, legal framework, partnerships → development

Projects launch → project activation by Astar and its community → Tokens allocated to Astar → Burndrop → Arbitrage + Demand for ASTR + Supply reduction → Repeat

---

As always, this is just my view — but I strongly believe the Burndrop mechanism is far more powerful than most people currently realize.

Looking forward to hearing your thoughts

[you425]

Thank you for the excellent post!
From a mechanics perspective, I largely agree overall.

That said, I think the main reason discussions like this don’t surface more often from the community is simply that “it’s unclear what token people will ultimately receive.” Once it becomes clear what kind of token that will be, there will be a basis for forming expectations, and at that point this kind of mechanism will likely start to gain real traction.

[SimonB]

Hi @Poggi_Luca ,
thanks a lot for this post. I read it very carefully and I honestly think it’s one of the most interesting and clear analyses shared so far on the Burndrop.

In my opinion, you highlighted a point that very few people had really focused on: the Burndrop is not just a distribution mechanism, but introduces very concrete and real economic dynamics, intentionally built into the system design.

The arbitrage part is, to me, the core of the whole reasoning. Once the market has a clear reference for the value (market cap or FDV) of the Startale ecosystem token distributed via Burndrop, if ASTR allows access to something that is worth more, an economic incentive is automatically created. This advantage exists until the two valuations (mcCap) align: as a result, the market is pushed to buy ASTR, use it in the Burndrop and burn it, until ASTR’s market cap rises enough to reach the valuation of the counterpart token. This is exactly the process that naturally closes the arbitrage and drives valuation alignment, purely through rational market behavior.

Another important aspect is that this reasoning holds true regardless of knowing today which specific Startale ecosystem token will be involved. The project may change, but the economic logic remains the same, because it’s the mechanism itself that drives capital flows.

Thanks again for sharing this perspective with the community
Posts like this really help raise the level of discussion.

[Matt]

Strong analysis and very clearly framed.

One point I’d add is that the real power of Burndrop may lie in its optionality: participants are not pricing a single token, but repeated access to future arbitrage opportunities engineered by design. Even before a concrete token is known, ASTR effectively becomes a meta-access asset to asymmetric upside events.

Once the market internalizes this repeatability (the flywheel), valuation may start reflecting not just a single Burndrop, but the expected value of future ones. That’s likely where the mechanism shifts from being “interesting” to being structurally priced in.

[Marroz]

Great Luca, your post on the Burndrop is explained perfectly: forced arbitrage, deflationary flywheel… if executed well, it can be truly devastating Precisely because I believe in it, I’d like to dive deeper into some potential weak points that could slow down the magic:Participation in the PoC: It’s true, a few days after launch (December 17), the numbers are still quite low, but it’s understandable – this PoC is mostly a test of faith: you burn a symbolic amount and in return you get a Passport NFT (SBT). For the real Burndrop in 2026, though, we’ll need a massive information campaign from all involved parties (Startale, Soneium, Astar Foundation, and the projects/tokens that will launch), otherwise participation risks staying limited even then.

Ratio and parameters: Who exactly decides the burn/reward ratio and the supply of the new tokens? If they calibrate it too conservatively to “balance” the ecosystem, the incentive drops and few people participate.

Reward dump risk: Even with a generous ratio, if the new tokens have short vesting or high supply, people grab the allocation → sell immediately → create sell pressure instead of accumulation.

Slow execution: Astar often has great roadmaps but delivery that comes late or without immediate explosion. If the Startale/Soneium projects don’t take off quickly or the Burndrop gets delayed, community trust drops further.

Dependence on bull market: The mechanism shines brightest in a bull market (high participation, rewards worth it right away). In a prolonged bear until 2026, it risks attracting only the hardcore believers – not enough to kickstart the real flywheel.
This isn’t criticism – quite the opposite, I want this to become bulletproof. What do you think, how do we cover these risks?Thanks for the top-tier post, eyes wide open on the Burndrop

[Manu0x51]

Hello Astar Community!

As a DeFi strategist, I am pleased to present a comprehensive analysis of the Astar Evolution Phase 2. The Burndrop mechanism is far more than a standard distribution event; it is a sophisticated value extraction model powered by structural supply destruction.

I have read all your considerations and I feel it is right to list the strengths and weaknesses, in my opinion.

• Strengths:

  • Capital Absorption: Unlike traditional staking, burning removes ASTR from the circulating supply permanently, neutralizing future sell-side pressure.

  • Engineered Arbitrage: The gap between ASTR’s Market Cap and the intrinsic value of the incoming ecosystem tokens (e.g., Soneium) creates a “forced” buy-side demand.

  • ASTR as “Meta-Access”: The token evolves into the exclusive gateway for all high-potential projects within the Startale ecosystem.

• Weaknesses:

  • Psychological Friction: Transitioning users from “holding” to “destroying” capital requires a significant paradigm shift.

  • Ecosystem Dependency: The mechanism’s success is intrinsically tied to the market’s appetite for the third-party tokens being distributed.

  • Execution Risk: Conservative reward ratios may fail to trigger the necessary arbitrage momentum.

The Arbitrage Flywheel: ASTR vs. $TOKEN

Consider a scenario where the market has not yet efficiently priced the Burndrop event:

Hypothetical Baseline:

• ASTR Market Cap: $100M (Price: $0.015).

• $TOKEN Estimated FDV: $1B (Based on institutional rounds).

• Burndrop Allocation: 10% of $TOKEN supply ($100M in value).

• Participation Cap: 2 Billion ASTR (~$30M at current prices).

Market Dynamics: In this scenario, the protocol offers $100M in value for the destruction of $30M in ASTR, creating a 3.3:1 value ratio. Smart money and DeFi traders will aggressively acquire ASTR on the open market to capture this $3.33-for-$1 inefficiency. This massive buy volume, coupled with the immediate burn of the acquired tokens, creates a dual-force price catalyst that typically leads to rapid valuation alignment.

Strategic Roadmap for Improvement

1. “Soft-Burn” & Treasury Support: To ensure long-term stability, a portion of the ASTR committed could be directed to a DAO-managed treasury for strategic buybacks, rather than 100% immediate destruction.

2. Loyalty-Tiered Rewards: Implement a “Safety Buffer” where the most aggressive arbitrage ratios are reserved for Passport NFT holders or long-term stakers. This prevents “mercenary” bots from draining value and rewards true conviction.

3. Gamified Vesting: Link the reward token’s vesting schedule to continued ASTR staking, ensuring that participants remain aligned with the network’s health post-burn.

Data analysis suggests that ASTR currently faces a significant hurdle: it is unlikely to generate organic transaction fees comparable to major Ethereum Layer-2s (such as Base or Arbitrum) in the near term. These giants dominate the capture of traders and liquidity providers.

Therefore, it is crucial to design mechanisms that facilitate the acquisition of ASTR. We must move beyond “organic growth” and lean into incentivized buy volume. By positioning ASTR as a scarce, consumable resource required to access high-value speculative events, we can attract the speculators and volume drivers necessary to sustain the ecosystem’s momentum until 2026.

[Manu0x51]

I always humbly allow myself to better explain the arbitration mechanism stated above.

1. The Value Gap (the Incentive)

Imagine Astar announces that by burning $1 worth of ASTR, you receive an allocation of $TOKEN (a new Startale/Soneium project) that—based on market prices or investment rounds—is worth $3.33.

Situation: You have an immediate 233% potential profit.

Market reaction: DeFi traders and arbitrage bots instantly spot this “inefficiency.” No one wants to leave free money on th table.

2. Buying Pressure (Demand)

To capture that $3.33 gain, traders must own ASTR.

Those who don’t already have it start buying aggressively on exchanges (Binance, Kraken, etc.).

This surge in demand creates high trading volume and strong upward pressure on the price.

3. Supply Reduction (Burn)

Unlike a typical airdrop, where tokens are merely “locked,” the ASTR used for arbitrage is permanently destroyed (or partially)

Scarcity effect: While demand rises (step 2), the circulating supply shrinks sharply.

From a simple economic standpoint, when demand goes up and supply goes down, the price is forced to rise—and often much more aggressively.

4. Reaching Equilibrium

The “flywheel” keeps spinning until the price of ASTR increases to the point where the cost of burning it equals the value of the reward received.

Example: If ASTR triples in price to $0.045, burning one ASTR now costs the same as the value of the reward. At that point, the arbitrage opportunity is gone, and the price stabilizes around a new, higher support level.

Why this matters

As mentioned in the conclusion, Astar can’t rely solely on network fees (gas fees) like Arbitrum or Base, which benefit from massive organic volume. It needs to create artificial scarcity that still makes economic sense.

The Burndrop turns ASTR from a simple governance token into a consumable resource required to extract value from the entire Startale ecosystem. Without this mechanism, there would be little incentive for speculators and large liquidity holders to buy in and make a long-term bet on the token.

Vesting Strategy: the “3% Monthly Stream”

To make the Burndrop successful over the long term, the release of the rewarded tokens ($TOKEN) must not be immediate.

The mechanism: a linear release of 3% per month (roughly 33 months in total).

Tokenomics impact:

1. Price stability
   Releasing only 3% per month prevents the circulating supply of $TOKEN from overwhelming initial demand, protecting the price from sharp post-launch crashes.

2. Long-term alignment
   Users who burned ASTR remain “invested” in the ecosystem for almost three years, naturally becoming early supporters and active users of the new network.

3. Flywheel synchronization
   While ASTR is burned immediately (a supply shock), the new token enters the market slowly, keeping interest high for subsequent Burndrop cycles.

A clear reality emerges from the data: in the short term, it’s unlikely that ASTR will generate a critical mass of organic fees comparable to major Ethereum L2s like Base or Arbitrum, which benefit from a constant inflow of traders and liquidity providers.

Astar’s challenge is therefore existential. If it can’t compete on fees alone, it must compete on capital utility. That means giving users a reason to buy ASTR not to “hold it in a wallet,” but to consume it as fuel to access asymmetric opportunities—like the Burndrop.

Only by creating forced buying volume and attracting rational speculators can Astar offset the temporary lack of organic activity and build a solid liquidity base—one that, over time, will also attract real, organic traders.

[MrKarahanli-Emre]

All your personal comments are quite interesting, and in my opinion, there may be a few points that should be added.

The SBT passport provided by this PoC Burndrop, which is in the testing phase, could serve as an entry ticket to the Startale ecosystem.

Although no official reward has been announced yet, it has already been stated that it will be beneficial in the future. Startale is developing several projects simultaneously. These include:

-Soneium

-Astar

-Startale App

-Some small-scale dApps (BD support, etc.)

-An RWA platform in collaboration with SBI Holding

-Two stablecoins based on the Yen and Dollar

While not guaranteed, priority may be given to future rewards across all developed products. SBT holders and participants in the upcoming comprehensive Burndrop event may gain value from these developed products! (Well… hopefully… :D)

[Marroz]

Hello community,after closely following the Burndrop PoC (huge respect to the team for launching it in such a clean way), I’ve been thinking intensely about the full event in 2026.The bullish thesis that’s going around (like the famous thread “The Burndrop Explained”) is clear and powerful: if the Foundation designs parameters that create a clearly >1 ratio (value received in new tokens >> value of ASTR burned), especially with a tight cap on total burn or a whitelist based on the PoC, it generates a massive mathematical arbitrage. This attracts huge capital into ASTR, drastically reduces the circulating supply, and finally aligns long-term holders with a deflationary flywheel that can significantly revalue ASTR.My fear is that this won’t happen.

That the Foundation, in order to maintain a strongly institutional narrative — that is, to avoid appearing too speculative, to guarantee “predictability” to institutional investors (Sony, Toyota, SBI, etc.), and to avoid any perception of price manipulation — will choose overly conservative parameters and a ratio that’s too cautious, close to 1:1 or just slightly above.The result would be:Low participation in the Burndrop.

Marginal supply reduction.

No real scarcity effect.

ASTR continuing to remain dramatically undervalued compared to the enormous potential of the Startale ecosystem (Sony, Soneium, enterprise adoption).

Honestly: Astar has fallen too low, lost too much market share and too much trust in recent years. We can no longer afford half measures. We need an aggressive ratio that triggers significant burns and a real mathematical pump, otherwise the Burndrop risks being just a symbolic exercise.I believe Astar deserves more. We need courage, not compromises.Let’s go Astar, it’s time to get back to the top

[Matt]

Building on my earlier point, what I find most interesting here is less the “price pump” framing and more the idea of Burndrop as a behavior-shaping primitive. It doesn’t just attract capital, it constrains how that capital can behave.

The open question for me is how predictable this becomes over time. If participants start modeling Burndrops as expected events, the arbitrage window may compress faster, shifting value from price impact to coordination efficiency. That may actually be a feature rather than a bug, but it suggests governance over cadence and sizing will be critical.

[Marroz]

«Your reasoning is correct in theory: the Burndrop as a mechanism that shapes behaviors, filters true holders, and over time shifts value from speculative pumps to efficient coordination is an elegant and mature idea.The problem is that, in Astar’s current reality, it feels like a somewhat abstract exercise disconnected from the ground.The PoC – yes, it had no direct rewards and wasn’t designed to maximize participation – still closed with only 311 participants and about 630k ASTR burned. These are objectively very low numbers for a project that’s been around for years and that should have a community that’s convinced and aligned on the long term.If even in a symbolic test phase with negligible cost (locking 2026 ASTR, about $20 at current prices) we can’t get more than 300 people involved, that’s a strong warning sign about the actual level of trust and motivation in the base right now.Continuing to reason as if we’re already in a super-mature governance phase, dismissing hype and healthy speculation as something “inferior,” risks making us ignore that without a minimum of energy, external attention, and volume, a token slowly slides into irrelevance: today Astar is steadily beyond the 300th position by market cap, with the price continuing to hit new lows.Efficient coordination and believer selection are beautiful goals, but they only make sense if there’s still a lively and sizable community to coordinate and select.That’s why the real concrete focus right now should be on the ratio that the Foundation will apply in the main 2026 Burndrop: how many Startale/Soneium ecosystem tokens we’ll actually receive for each ASTR burned. That will be the parameter that decides whether the mechanism can truly incentivize significant participation and create perceived value, or whether it remains a symbolic gesture that doesn’t move the needle.»

[FFR23]

The issue for low turnout is pretty simple:

we’re being spammed with long post after long post and we still have no idea what the outcome is.

The theory behind the burndrop is extremely simple - i think the communication around the burndrop could be refined.

Just constructive feedback

[sanyun]

I participated in this POC activity and I basically agree with your ideas. People spent 2026 ASTR, which was worth $20 at the time. Obviously, for a project that has been running for many years, the number of participants is too small. This also indicates the current dilemma of blockchain, where the attention of old users has shifted from ASTR to other blockchains. ASTR has no new hotspots, no new stories, and even no new users. Although the ASTR Foundation has been operating and exploring new possibilities, the fact is that the token value of ASTR has dropped from $0.1 to $0.01, which seriously affects the confidence of community users in holding ASTR.

[Manu0x51]

The 311 people who participated are few.
The token is no longer valid for two simple reasons:

1. There are no volumes
2. There is no speculation

My words may hurt and offend some in the community and the foundation, but they are the harsh, naked truth and must be accepted.

The question must be simple: Why should a user buy ASTR?
From my point of view, there are two reasons:

1. To play, ASTR must be the only token available for play. It must not be possible for a person to decide whether to play with USDT or ASTR; they must only go through ASTR.
2. To speculate, traders, liquidity providers do it for the money, not because they believe in the project.

Therefore, it is unfortunate to say this, but either we hope for an ALT coin that boosts everyone and everything indiscriminately, or at the current stage, the selling pressure will not stop because there is no demand.

[Ck100procat]

Sorry, this might sound harsh.

1. If tokens obtained through Burndrop have no value, no one would willingly burn their ASTR for worthless tokens—especially since they paid for that ASTR.
2. This mechanism will reveal its outcome the moment it’s actually implemented. If the first tokens burned don’t exceed the current ASTR price or holders’ cost basis, the mechanism can be declared a failure.

[Manu0x51]

Your consideration reveals a harsh truth.
To burn what you already own (ASTR), you must have great faith in what you will be given. BUT if what you are given:

1. is not in volume

2. is not speculative

then you are back to square one.

This truth may hurt, but we must face it.

[Ck100procat]

Yes, that’s precisely why I said that if the first wave of people are willing to burn their ASTR to exchange for new tokens and achieve positive returns on them, then the observers who are holding back will be willing to follow suit. The first project is the most crucial one. If it fails, it means permanent failure. In the crypto space, you only get one shot. You can’t prove that your second or third projects will succeed.

[FFR23]

I’m kind of confused now.

Burndrop is a 1 time opportunity.

There are no future burndrops?

Is everyone just using AI / chatGPT to talk to each other in here now? Painfully obvious which posters are using it by the way - the critical thinking and value in reading posts is severely declining.

[Manu0x51]

Probably “is a 1 time opportunity” means that the experiment is an important opportunity to understand if there will be positive results on the value of ASTR

[you425]

At present, the number of Burndrop events that are planned is one. That said, there has also been mention of the possibility that it could be conducted again in the future. This potential has been referenced both in posts from the Astar Foundation and in the AMA I recently held with Sota. However, since the tokens obtained through Burndrop will basically go through Startale, it is difficult to predict how this will ultimately play out.

In addition, as many of you have pointed out, for the number of Burndrop participants to increase, the expected value of the tokens that can be obtained needs to exceed the ASTR exchange ratio. Otherwise, it would effectively mean throwing away assets, and participation would likely remain low.

This event provides arbitrage opportunities: ASTR holders can benefit from the resulting price appreciation, while participants can gain the value of new tokens without selling their ASTR. Broadly speaking, there are advantages for most parties involved, but needless to say, the key driving force lies in the specific conditions under which the new tokens can be obtained.