#代币估值与上线 Seeing the recent token burn vote by the Hyper Foundation, I was reminded of the wave of projects in 2017. The fact that 85% of staked voting weight supported burning HYPE from the aid fund actually reflects a market maturity—shifting from the early mindset of "more tokens are better" to a rational understanding of supply management.

I remember those years when many projects launched with great enthusiasm to issue tokens, fearing insufficient liquidity. The result? Token devaluation to trash levels, and investors getting trapped hard. I've seen too many such cases—from sky-high expectations to price crashes, and eventually becoming junk coins. Back then, no one really cared about inflation pressure; everyone was betting on later investors to take over.

Hyper’s current approach is actually correcting this old problem. Proactively burning tokens to constrain supply—something that would have been unthinkable back then. From a market psychology perspective, this indicates that both project teams and token holders are valuing long-term valuation over short-term hype. The 8% abstain and 7% oppose votes are also noteworthy, showing that consensus is still forming, but the overall direction is clear.

However, history has shown us that token burning is just the beginning of the story. The key lies in subsequent execution and market performance. Ultimately, a token’s valuation depends on whether the project’s actual utility can support it. Whether this move was right or not, time will tell.