2026-01-04 17:25:44

The real issue with project buybacks is not whether they can boost the token price, but where the money is going. If it's not used for buybacks or dividends, where does the project team plan to invest? What kind of returns can be expected?

This is the key—how funds are used determines whether value is created or destroyed. Hosting small offline summits, throwing money into uncertain R&D projects, or maintaining a bunch of inefficient redundant staff—these kinds of decisions usually have a negative return on investment. Instead of wasting resources this way, it's better to honestly return profits to the community and let the market verify the project team's capital management capabilities. Transparency in fund allocation and efficiency in usage are the critical indicators of a project's long-term value.

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.

11 Likes

Reward
11
7
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

pumpamentalist

· 01-07 14:35

At the end of the day, it's a matter of trust. I just want to know how the money is actually spent—don't give me any empty promises.

View OriginalReply0

Web3ExplorerLin

· 01-07 11:59

hypothesis: most projects are basically running the ancient silk road playbook but in reverse—instead of bridging value across chains, they're just vanishing capital into black holes masquerading as "strategic investments"

Reply0

FreeMinter

· 01-04 17:50

Basically, it's about where the money was spent—that's the real skill in evaluating a project. Most projects love to spend money recklessly, then act innocent afterward. If a project dares to open its books and speak transparently, you can basically tell everything. These days, buybacks and dividends have become the most honest choices.

View OriginalReply0

DustCollector

· 01-04 17:42

That's right, but I'm just worried that project teams are just using the money to play a confusing game. Really, buybacks to pump the price are all superficial; the key question is where that money ultimately ends up. Why do I feel like most project teams are just thinking about how to reasonably "spend" it... Spending on offline events, nurturing teams, doing R&D—how do they justify these expenses? Instead of guessing riddles, it's better to just look at the flow of funds; there's nothing to hide. Is it still worth boasting about a negative return on investment? Why not directly distribute dividends and let the community judge your level? Once transparency is up, there's nowhere for tricks to hide.

View OriginalReply0

CoffeeNFTrader

· 01-04 17:37

That's right, too many projects are just accounting black holes, and no one knows how the money is spent once it goes in. Isn't direct dividends more appealing? Why bother with all those complicated schemes? The black box of funds is outrageous, no wonder retail investors have all left. Buybacks to pump the price are outdated; what's really important is where the money is actually being used. Over the past few years, I've seen too many project teams squander funds, and it's truly speechless. Instead of guessing, it's better to open the books directly; transparency is the foundation of trust.

View OriginalReply0

LiquidityNinja

· 01-04 17:36

There's nothing wrong with that; many projects just like to do this... after fundraising, they start burning money, hosting a ghostly summit with few attendees, and R&D is even more of a black hole. Transparency is indeed the dividing line between genuine projects and those just trying to fleece investors.

View OriginalReply0

HashRateHustler

· 01-04 17:26

Well said, but I'm afraid the project teams are just pretending not to hear. How many actually reveal the true flow of funds?

View OriginalReply0