What are some plans to increase the utility of ALGO while the market is rampant with gamblers and liquidity hunters with absolutely 0 regard for the long-term prospects of the network’s native asset? There has to be some sort of counter measures as a startup in this phase to be laser-focused on maintaining the consistent ALGO usage, no? How can we just pretend/let it all be “decentralised” when the founders already made a centric decision to have early investors with a large amount of (unlocked!) ALGO supply constantly giving an overwhelming sell pressure? For example, Axelar Network is a direct competitor which the founders were part of the original founding members of Algorand blockchain.
Algorand network by itself is obviously not going to be sustainable with fees alone. And from what I have been seeing with these numerous startups with little to no qualifications being offered a gracious financial support from the Algorand Foundation left n right, I’m confused how the Foundation has been justifying the treasury spending that are derived from the og investors’ liquidity with no contracted-out terms to return the values back to the ecosystem.
Is the Foundation even aware, during this amateur phase of the market discovery, 90% of these projects that have created their own tokens out of thin air are simply diluting the existing liquidity, OUT of the Algorand’s market cap and into personal savings (whether in BTC, USDT, USDC, USD, EURO, etc.), before ALGO is actually utilised in any practical, tangibly meaningful way??? I mean, the Foundation is leading this wash trading movement at the moment. I understand some dapps need to create the token to “survive”, but this is just getting way too one-sided with no foreplaning, esp. by the Foundation’s selloffs. Was this the plan all along and the whole tokenomics until 2030, was just a farce like many of these recent “partnerships”? The Foundation have been changing the original tokenomics like it’s been nothing (know off top of my head at least 2 changes to the token distribution was made in the last minute with no announcement or any justification).
Is there a way for ALGO to be used instead of dapps creating their own token? Is ALGO nothing more than a governance token? Was ALGO originally created to just launder other assets?
ALGO token is currently 2 spots away from back to being #40s in the market cap ranking since the insane inflation via accelerated vesting that killed off the momentum as the '21 crash happened; all of this is about to for naught as we trace back with little to no expansion in terms of actual organic growth instead of Foundation injecting synthetic liquidity, aka a project announces itself as a dead zombie.
What are in the plans to increase the utility of ALGO???
pay any transaction fees on algo blockchain (for asset transfer, app call or algo transfer)
as the main token in all AMMs
governance
ppos verification
The arbitrages are so efficient that the profits are lower than fees paid in algorand, so the algorand is making more money usually than arbitragers…
Governance is locking the algos in friendly manner… You can take your algos but you do not get governance rewards.
PPOS is done in even more friendlier manner… You just have algos on your account, and if you select server or run your own algod node you verify with your current balance the blockchain. (No locking)
2030 is quite far… I believe in that time the fees collected from transactions will cover the costs of all servers to run the network. I estimate that algo will do on average 500 tx/s with algo price 10$ … It will be 43200 algos collected per day, which is $432,000 which is for sure going to cover all relay node costs, indexer server costs, participation node costs and they will have enough money to drive the ecosystem. (note that if the algo price is 10$, the tx fee is $0,01 which is sustainable for all projects)
Currently there is 700000 - 2000000 txs per day which is 1000 Algos collected per day which is 250$ which is absolutely not enough to cover the costs.
Therefore i see the goal to increase addoption by the foundation and inc as good goal.
Btw I see also good tactics to invest into projects which will deliver continuos dividends, which will add to the budget to secure network and drive more addoption after 2030.
I sense from the Inc side that they’re definitely wanting to play the long-game, but certainly not on the Foundation’s end (this entity is the most spendthrift Foundation i’ve ever interacted with in all my defi exp relative to other blockchains, maybe even outside of crypto and in my 30+ yrs of BD; the level of their spending compared to the output is just simply insanely high it doesn’t make sense, just for brand exposure. I really hope the Foundation is specifying in the contracts what they are expecting in return, preferably with an expiration, that the public cannot see. So far, nothing has come to fruition practically in terms of value of the network to showcase for. Hell, we still don’t even have any smart contracts for carbon offsets, and that was the entire/if not the biggest 2021-2022’s focus. It’s all a farce atm (and we all know it just holding on to our faith now), and they need to start proving themselves by walking the talk.
i dont know what exactly you are looking for, but the burn can be done simply by sending token to some address and rekey that account to AAAAAAA… address or using vestige burn vault Vaults – Vestige
i dont know why there are no EUAs or CERs the tokens from kyoto protocol (now paris agreement) … i requested grant 2 years ago to put them onchain, but probably they did not understand … i already had a bot at EU ETS registry to track the credits in my system
however we are in discussion with biggest carbon credits project on ethereum and we might bridge it to algo network using aramid bridge
regarding marketing, i think new CMO will try to do her best and setup some metrics and quantify the results of the campaigns… i heard at twitter space that she is going to compare algorand to other blockchains and pinpoint the best from it…
the quick summary of algo vs others:
Pros:
algo is fast and stable
highest swapping throughput
DeFi is more mature then elsewhere
algo is cheap
the route to DAO
carbon negative
community focused on good tech
instant transactions, 1 block economic finality
Cons:
There is central point of failure - setting up DNS records of relays
Small number of public nodes provider
Low marketing support for mainnet launched project from foundation
No official support to make the account online from web
Distribution to early backers seems unfair
Some central decisions are strange
Small community
No native currencies stable coins (except USD)
Creating smart contracts for algo is more complicated then on EVM
No audited set of smart contracts, lack of integration samples
Slow route to DAO, inefficient mechanisms are set in place
The real question is what Jessica Tsai Chin, new CMO can do about the cons so that we solve them and marketize it as solved…
I believe that the most efficient way to popularize the live projects on algorand is to organize the live meeting with someone form algorand, some experienced youtuber and project representative… If this type of trio would do the recording each day it might be the most efficient way to popularize the algorand, content creators and projects…
I agree with all of the points, esp cons. Pros should do the talking by themselves, but so much grunt work is needed to resolve the cons; I honestly have yet to witness any practical structuring by the Foundation to relieve these centralized ops, instead the network is becoming more personalized than ever by the latest CEO (cannot get political/unnecessarily polarized enough with hyper concentration on ESG, women-inclusivity, personally tailored charities to completely unrelated orgs like GothamFC and Climate Ride, blatant degenerate finance mgmt like $35M(!) loss on a platform literally called Holdanut, etc.).
This is no longer the same investment I have made back in 2020, and I wish Silvio Micali would increase his presence more to ground the wearying leadership (still no news of new Inc CEO right? We essentially had two heads chopped off in <5 yrs of inception without anyone particularly interested in the role so had no choice to promote within… That’s a sign about the outlook of the company from outside, if there is one imho). The only positive outcome that’s shining from AF atm is perhaps the new CTO, who is developing the Algokit which can/already committed to amend all the lacking technical stuff listed in the Cons, quite easily I feel. I’m confused on the “Slow route to DAO, inefficient mechanisms are set in place” that other chains don’t experience.
Quite curious what your project is on Ethereum, as I’m heavy into that ecosystem also. Regarding the Carbon Credits on Algorand, it was my understanding the carbon offset contracts that some projects are pledging with the Foundation via ClimateTrade was in the plans to be recorded through smart contracts to show transparency and most importantly, accountability in actually doing it, not just words and handshakes like many of the crooked ESG projects are today - Fake Carbon Credits Market. If it can be a simple tx as you note, where are they? What happened to them??
Wholeheartedly agree about the last point on being more efficient in brand exposure. If xGov program will allow us to be “employed” with assigned tasks than just being sideline investors, we ought to use the existing mgmt resources that cefi entreprise is using to operate in the highest production mode possible. Everything just seems so half-assed right now if I had to be blunt. Instead of silly little Twitter spaces, where everyone just sits around for 1-2hrs without much value adding, let’s set up a Zoom with PPTs and clear directions for xGovs to delegate fitting tasks for ex. The existing Gitcoin Bounty program can be used for this. Staci increased the Foundation by 67% as of last year now staggering with 70+! employees. Surely, some of them could lead this - Algorand Foundation Revenue is my small food for thought…
