2025-12-06 23:27:06

The SAFEMARS supply keeps shrinking—2.56% already gone through burns.

What's driving this? The contract itself. Every creator reward automatically triggers a buyback, then torches those tokens. No manual intervention needed.

The math is straightforward: rising demand meets a supply that only goes down. That's your flywheel spinning—scarcity builds, price responds. The mechanism runs itself, hardcoded into the protocol.

Deflationary tokenomics playing out in real-time. When burns are baked into the architecture rather than dependent on governance votes, the supply curve only moves one direction.

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.

13 Likes

Reward
13
5
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

MetaverseLandlord

· 7h ago

The token-burning mechanism operates automatically; this is the right way to do it. It's much better than those who just talk about burning tokens but never actually take any action.

View OriginalReply0

LucidSleepwalker

· 16h ago

Auto-burn? I’ve seen this trick too many times. The key is whether there will be real trading volume to back it up later on.

View OriginalReply0

TokenSleuth

· 16h ago

Hardcoded token burning, this is true deflation... Much more reliable than those projects that just talk about it.

View OriginalReply0

SchrodingerWallet

· 16h ago

Damn, this thing auto-burns tokens? Is that for real? --- I've seen this flywheel trick before, just not sure how long it can keep spinning. --- Hardcoded burning sounds awesome, but in the end, it still depends on whether the price goes up. --- Is 2.56% considered a lot? Feels a bit iffy. --- The automatic mechanism is definitely convenient, no need to wait for voting. --- Constantly decreasing supply sounds great, but you still need buyers to keep it going. --- If this flywheel can't get spinning, dilution is pointless anyway. --- It's nice that the contract does the work automatically, but can it keep burning over time? --- Why does it feel like every deflationary project uses the same logic? --- Hardcoded in so it can't run away, at least that's more reliable than governance voting.

View OriginalReply0

PrivateKeyParanoia

· 16h ago

This mechanism sounds cool, but how long can it really last? --- Auto-burn sounds nice, just worried they might pull some tricks later. --- 2.56% isn’t a lot or a little... let’s see how much actually gets burned. --- The contract hardcodes the burn, so you have to believe it now, right? --- Supply only decreases, never increases—now that's real scarcity. --- Hardcoded burn sounds badass, but isn’t price still driven by demand? --- ngl, this model has been played out before—the key is whether it can actually keep traction. --- Auto buyback and burn, but here’s the question... is there enough liquidity? --- Another flywheel theory... they say this every time, then what? --- 2.56% is burned, but can the rest hold steady? That’s the real question.

View OriginalReply0

Trending TopicsView More
#JoinGrowthPointsDrawToWiniPhone17
285.29K Popularity
#DecemberMarketOutlook
78.99K Popularity
#PostonSquaretoEarn$50
14.3K Popularity
#LINKETFToLaunch
13.84K Popularity
#SharingMy100xToken
15.98K Popularity

Hot Gate FunView More

1
GHOSTGhost
MC:$3.61KHolders:2
0.34%
2
BONDXBONDX
MC:$3.58KHolders:3
0.00%
3
ICBGIceberg
MC:$10.5KHolders:12
27.34%
4
GBIRDGBird
MC:$3.53KHolders:1
0.00%
5
HLHuLi
MC:$3.53KHolders:1
0.00%

Sitemap