Agreed. All of this information that was presented in the reply is findable via a linkedin search…
Ardent believers or not what exciting tokenomics projects have you and your team worked on?
2 Likes
Whether ZEN tokenomics are changed or a new coin is created, what is important to investors is to know that they won’t get “screwed”, after supporting the project during all those years (up to 7 years).
It would be good to see a post detailing why the team thinks that long-term success of New Horizen is incompatible with the current 21M coins cap.
Why wouldn’t the people that Rob met join New Horizen with the current tokenomics? Or with different tokenomics while still maintaining the 21M cap?
If that’s all (or mainly) about being able to invest at a lower price, that doesn’t seem fair to the old investors who supported the team and all the (high) financial risks inherent to that. Including the huge inflation of ZEN since the launch of the project 7 years ago. We were just about to get to the second halving, then boom… “thank you guys for you patience, now let’s completely change the tokenomics, including the max supply of ZEN to make new investors happy” (that’s how it may look like).
Another thing about dilution, is that Horizen Labs, its employees and Grayscale (which is the main shareholder of Horizen Labs, if I’m not mistaken) wouldn’t be impacted as much as “simple” investors, as if that dilution is a prerequisite to new partnerships it would mean more business for Horizen Labs and thus an increasing income, which could (more than?) compensate for the dilution of the ZEN they hold. Other ZEN holders won’t get anything from that increase in revenue, they can only count on the price of ZEN (or the new coin) to increase (or at least not lose its value).
As I said in a previous post, I’m looking forward to the study, while hoping that the best interest of long term investors will also be taken into account, even in this new situation where the team seems (well this is my impression) to not need the support of the current community members as much as in the past in order to reach its goals.
There is surely a way to satisfy all parties, let’s do our best to find out what that is.
About potentially following the path of creating a new coin, an interesting solution may be to redefine the purpose of the current Horizen ecosystem. We could define much more simple and basic goals than those of New Horizen (which may separate from the current Horizen ecosystem). A less rapidly evolving system, with more basic goals… Perhaps something looking like an improved version of Bitcoin. A project that would have a chance to still exist even with no development during years (but would have a team nonetheless). Then the Horizen Labs team would move to another Horizon (after having given a fair share of the new coin to the Horizen community, of course 
), parting ways with the old Horizen ecosystem.
Then ideally, both projects would meet success, in their own way. Easier said than done, yes. I’m just brainstorming
6 Likes
Hello everyone,
As Special Council member, we’ve been observing the ongoing activity regarding the tokenomics discussion, and we’re eager to engage the community and initiate a conversation to progress this topic further.
8 Likes
In the Korean community, there is a majority of negative opinions regarding the new tokenomics.
Here are their main concerns:
- They believe that changing the tokenomics would have less impact than the value increase due to scarcity.
- They think that Horizen’s identity will be lost, as they believe that Horizen Labs is abandoning $ZEN.
- They expect a decline in the value of $ZEN without a swap.
(Desired scenario Ex. Swap Horizen : New Horizen = 1 : 4) - They fear that Implementing the new tokenomics will waste this current bull market cycle.
- They question how changing the tokenomics will attract investments, expressing skepticism towards the team.
- Some argue that it resembles a Soft rug pull
This part of the debate is heated
16 Likes
Im reading a lot of catchy words but nothing is really being said here that helps explain who outerland capital is and why they should be trusted. Unfortunately im beginning to not trust anything involving this entire project. Theres a bait and switch feel to whats happening. This is where the big VCs and funds make money at the expense of the lil guys.
2 Likes
Indeed, long-term investors value Zen’s original BTC + ETH genes. If it suddenly changes track, their interests will not be protected, violating the blockchain’s basic spirit. Maintaining Zen’s original vision and adding a new expansion is more reasonable.
3 Likes
If Horizen were to create a new token,
We do not desire for the value of ZEN to disappear with a single airdrop, as seen in cases like $Omisego and $Boba.
We want the value of ZEN to remain stable and continuously generate value.
For example:
New Token = $EON
Supernodes - Mining $ZEN
$ZEN - Governance and Staking
PoS Nodes (By. $ZEN) → Mining $EON
$EON - Utility (utilizing Zk modular fees, etc.)
Concerns:
There is concern regarding potential SEC regulatory implications due to the airdrop. While recent possibilities such as Ethereum ETF and Ripple’s partial victory in the lawsuit provide some reassurance, it’s not entirely risk-free.
4 Likes
Opinions on the issuance of new tokens: In addition to the airdrop, it is a good way to use the remaining new coins to pledge zen to mine new coins. In this way, everyone’s interests are guaranteed, and the purpose of locking and financing can be achieved. New coins cannot be unconditionally given to institutions, and all of them are released by the method of pledge zen, so that zen is bound to appreciate.
Generally speaking: maintain zen’s original token economics and basic vision, and then issue new coins to the new horizen’s modular platform. In addition to the airdrop part, the remaining new coins are pledged to mine new coins with zen, which is a good way. In this way, everyone’s interests are guaranteed, and the purpose of locking and financing can be achieved. New coins cannot be unconditionally given to institutions and other major customers, all of which are released by pledge zen, which is conducive to the appreciation of zen.
In this way, issuing new coins can get the support of the zen community, which is the best of both. This is also the current gameplay of sol, which is a precedent for success. In this way, the purpose is to solve the problem, not to cater to the institution. Otherwise, it will be unfair to the zen holder. The new coin leaves a part of the ecological incentive and reward team, which solves the problem of lack of funds and vitality in the original token economics.
That’s the way SOL’s tokenomics is currently working
I think SOL’s current tokenomic is an excellent example for us; wherever there’s a new token in SOL’s ecosystem, the only way to get the new token is by staking SOL to get the new token.
The new PVC token distributes a patio as ecosystem incentives and team rewards, which solves the problem of lack of funds and vitality in the original token economics.
3 Likes
New tokens can be airdropped in stages based on the number of stakings, similar to node income. In the early days, new tokens were scarce and could quickly pump 10x. It is easy to attract attention.
This is the golden shovel for $ZEN. Soon, more people will buy zen and stake $ZEN for airdrops.
By then, the price of zen will rise due to the rising tide of new coins.
Even if zen doesn’t rise, as long as you dig out gold with a shovel, who cares whether the shovel is gold or iron?
1 Like
Today $EOS announces a new tokenomics and many holders cheer because it’s good news. And the price goes up.
Horizen, on the other hand, wonders why its holders think tokenomics is negative. And the price goes down. Just the mention of tokenomics.
Please Think about where the difference in mood comes from.
What I’m saying is there’s a vibe, a momentum. Couldn’t team stop it from going negative? There is no effort to create a positive atmosphere.
2 Likes
Because the two fundamental tokenomics parameters of ZEN, which are the coin issuance and the max supply, are the ones of Bitcoin, since the beginning of the project 7 years ago. Most community members joined Horizen partly because they were liking those tokenomics, and were very enthusiastic about combining them with an Ethereum-like platform. The team has always shown the same enthusiasm in that regard.
What makes Bitcoin so valuable, is that everyone knows that its tokenomics will never change. Its like a sacred rule. If there were serious talks starting about changing Bitcoin tokenomics and it would be feasible for big players to enforce those changes, panic from Bitcoin holders would ensue the same way it’s been for Zen holders.
That’s the big difference with EON, which tokenomics don’t resemble at all to those of Bitcoin.
Plus EON community members might have been expecting a tokenomics change for a long time, and might even have pushed for this change. While it’s not the case regarding Horizen. It’s a sudden, 180-degree shift from the team in that regard. I never saw any talks in the community (including the team) about removing the 21M cap, about a potential dilution, before. And the community knowing that the team probably has the firepower to impose its will if it wants to, well you get that confusion and panic…
It would be very welcome to see a post from the leadership, detailing why it thinks we have to move away from the current tokenomics, including changing the current max cap. Until then, confusion will remain strong.
3 Likes
As a member of the Special Council, I find it incredibly insightful to witness such an active discussion. While it’s understandable that not everyone may be on board with the IP, the inputs provided are quite valuable and allow us to look at the proposals from a 360-degree perspective. That’s why we, as the DAO, have the initial stage before the voting to get the feedback, so the community has its input and voice, and we are definitely getting there.
6 Likes
Rob addressed this in his posts above. To take one quote:
" 1. The tokenomics of a 2017 privacy coin don’t make sense for a modular blockchain in 2024. They just don’t, and they make even less sense when you realize that 2/3 of $ZEN that’ll ever exist has been mined.
2. Everyone who I’ve been talking to recommends either a brand new token or a revised $ZEN with new tokenomics. Most of these people run big funds, exchanges, market makers, or are influencers with big communities. Our supporters and community size would explode if they chose to support us, and they’re not doing it with the old tokenomics."
I was referring to a comprehensive explanation of the situation. That hasn’t been the case yet.
1 Like
What we need is some analysis to make an informed decision.
Too many conclusions have been made based on merely an offer of doing that analysis.
Indeed some have even put forward their support for a single idea mentioned in the comments, without knowing the full consequences.
Do the analysis, show the potential scenarios and their potential effects on the ecosystem.
Everyone should be making an informed decision, it feels responsible for someone to do some research.
If a new token is to be created or airdropped, does ZEN just become a method to obtain that new token, and then has no further utility?
I would like to see the possibilities for ZEN, at current supply/tokenomics (and the necessary adjustments considering new consensus / block times etc) and what happens in a number of scenarios where tokenomics are altered.
It should consider impact on business development, rewards, investors (retail and vc’s), etc, etc.
We can then have a more educated discussion.
5 Likes
Community feedback for Increasing Horizen Token Supply and Implementing a Fair Airdrop Strategy Please read and make any suggestions if you have any.
As a member of the community, I am excited to present a novel proposal aimed at enhancing the Horizen ecosystem by increasing the token supply and implementing a fair airdrop strategy. This proposal stems from the recognition of the need to foster the development and scalability of the modular proof of verification blockchain within Horizen, ensuring its long-term viability and success.
The current state of Horizen’s token supply may pose challenges in adequately funding the development and scaling efforts required for the modular proof of verification blockchain. To address this, I propose increasing the token supply to approximately 63 million, with a maximum limit of 84 million ZEN. This expansion in supply will provide the necessary resources to support the implementation of the blockchain infrastructure effectively.
In considering this proposal, one crucial aspect to address is the retention of value invested in the project. It’s imperative to implement strategies that maintain the stability and growth of the Horizen ecosystem. This may entail strategic partnerships, market-making activities, and ongoing community engagement efforts to drive adoption and utilization of the platform.
To ensure a fair and inclusive distribution of tokens, I suggest conducting a 1-to-3 or 1 to 4 airdrop to all stakeholders of the community. This straightforward approach will allocate a portion of the increased token supply to each participant, fostering a sense of ownership and alignment of interests among the community members.
As we embark on this initiative, the guidance and expertise of Outerland Capital, our trusted financial and blockchain expert, are invaluable. Outerland Capital, I pose a question to you: Given the proposed increase in token supply and the 1-to-3 or 1 to 4 depending on witch multiplier you intend for the airdrop offer, how can we further refine this strategy to maximize its benefits for all stakeholders involved?
In conclusion, by increasing the token supply of Horizen and implementing a fair airdrop strategy, we can pave the way for the sustainable growth and success of our project. Through collaborative efforts and collective decision-making, we can unlock the full potential of Horizen and create a thriving ecosystem that benefits each and every member of our DAO community. Thank you for considering this feedback, and I look forward to working together towards a brighter future for Horizen.
P.s Yes i used chatgpt i did not bother to write an whole essay for my feedback by myself. Its a win win scenario you get to retain your value and you have more supply and Zen can be used as the proof verifier chain. No need for 2 chains.
Using chatgpt as you “couldn’t be bothered” and then expecting the suggestion to be “win win” makes absolutely no sense.
The whole point here is to have recognised experts analyse a number of possibilities and the impact they will have on the ecosystem and investors.
1 Like