Sam Frankel
@frankel
feels like the vast majority of token launches have been heavily criticized (fairly or unfairly) over the last few months - so i am looking for feedback: what would a best in class token launch look like for a long-term builder (specifically what does the team disclose, what are the lockups, what are the allocations, etc)?
11 replies
4 recasts
15 reactions
phil
@phil
a good token is the main asset that the team, investors, and community are using as a schelling point for me to truly trust a token launch, i would want it to be in lieu of an equity raise the team should hold the same asset as the community, otherwise it’s just an excuse for a liquidity event
0 reply
0 recast
9 reactions
Vinay Vasanji
@vinayvasanji.eth
aside from why a token the other part is maybe we can start embedding something already valuable or rare into a new token rather than just printing a new token with no backing an analogy might be gold standard pegged dollars (pre 1971) vs the current hope and pray for the best dollars (fed money printer) https://warpcast.com/vinayvasanji.eth/0x2fe3863d
0 reply
0 recast
3 reactions
Matthew Fox 🌐
@matthewfox
clank it
0 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
unbanksy (yes/acc)
@unbanksy
Lots of discourse focuses on optimizing the cap table (ie lockups, allos, vc vs team) but I want to bring to attention something more fundamental: liquidity and utility of the token. Most token launches today launch a vanilla erc-20 into a poorly thought out liquidity pool (mostly uni V2). And then add complex ve- and options vesting solutions to control supply emissions. This almost always results in poor price action and the blame is always on the cap table. The contrarian solution space @baselinemarkets is exploring is around making liquidity and utility native to the token. So every bToken launches with its own liquidity, logic for rebalancing that liquidity, and native staking, lending and leverage markets to bring utility on day one.
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
kevang30.base.eth
@kevang30.eth
I know that what I am going to comment is not something new, but I think that the main thing is that this token can have a use, if it is only launched for the sake of it, it depends on the fomo and normally when it disappears, the token also dies, obviously it must be protected against the most essential things to avoid rugs.
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Fran
@0x99fran
First question is why do you need a token?
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Gerigo22
@dioptro
Yes
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Bhase Bank
@bhasebank.eth
Study TYBG and take it to the next level. Tell community members to burn tokens to receive NFTs with utility, etc
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
caro.eth
@caro.eth
I’ve been thinking a lot about liquidity allocation and tokenomics of participation for an incremental reward system that promotes long term builders
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Piyush
@314yush
the problem with token launches is simply that -- it's a hidden secret, everyone knows XYZ product will launch token. so it's better to leverage it - token launches / launch mechanics have done really well here on farcaster, because: builders have been clear from day one about 1) what's the product 2) what and when's the token 3) what's the token utility. zora is now following a similar approach. protocols should announce openly 'once we hit xyz userbase over ABC period of time, we will launch a token' plain and simple, so that people can focus on using the product and not just speculation. most of the conversations with my degen friends is always about 'oh XYZ product has huge airdrop potential let's start using it' which is not sustainable for the long term.
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
ZKentin ↑
@zkentin
Tell MM to lower launch price. Vesting for investors and team should not last 2-3years but 5-8 years. Reintroduce ICOs, no need for airdrop.
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
