探索了APTOS Tokenomics：预售的估值差距和归属时间表甚至可以注定出色的项目

这是iinuma.io的首席顾问兼创始人Arthur Iinuma的来宾帖子和意见。虽然良好的标记学无法保存不健全的项目

The following is a guest post and opinion of Arthur Iinuma, Principal consultant and Founder of Iinuma.io.

以下是iinuma.io的首席顾问兼创始人Arthur Iinuma的来宾和意见。

While good tokenomics cannot save unsound projects, even the most promising network launches can fail from poor token design.

尽管良好的标记学无法保存不健全的项目，但即使是最有前途的网络启动也可能因糟糕的令牌设计而失败。

Spectacular flameouts like Terra LUNA and Celsius expose the dangers of financial sleight-of-hand—algorithmic stablecoins and yield schemes masquerading as innovation. But there are many more otherwise high-potential projects committing economic suicide through easily avoidable mistakes.

像Terra Luna和Celsius这样的壮观火焰暴露了经济策划的危险 - 算法的稳定稳定性和屈服于伪装成创新的计划。但是，还有更多其他的高潜力项目通过易于避免的错误来实施经济自杀。

Blue-chip projects with genuine technical merit and legitimate use cases, like Aptos, have watched billions in market cap evaporate overnight due to mismanaged token unlocks and poor communication. It’s critical for crypto founders to increase their emphasis on token design so great projects can build economic foundations as strong as their technical ones.

具有真正的技术优点和合法用例（如Aptos）的蓝筹项目，由于令牌不当，沟通不善和沟通不良，因此在一夜之间观看了数十亿美元的市值。对于加密创始人而言，将重点放在代币设计中至关重要，因此伟大的项目可以建立像技术技术一样强大的经济基础。

Fatal Flaws in Token Design

令牌设计中的致命缺陷

The biggest tokenomics mistakes I see in otherwise solid projects are:

我在否则可靠的项目中看到的最大的令牌学错误是：

Large Valuation Gaps

较大的估值差距

While it is customary for projects to offer early investors lower priced tokens compared to later rounds, founders should be careful in allowing wide pricing spreads between these early rounds and public buyers.

与以后的回合相比，项目习惯为早期投资者提供价格较低的代币，但创始人应谨慎地允许这些早期回合和公共买家之间的价格差异。

This may be easier said than done as shrewd investors demand lower prices against the threat of withholding investment. However, an investor with a low entry price in comparison to a later round essentially guarantees their upside even at prices lower than the cost basis of a public buyer. This means that a loss for buyers in later rounds may still result in gains for the earliest token holders – creating an unfair imbalance in the project’s token economy.

这可能会说起来容易做起来难，因为精明的投资者要求较低的价格与扣留投资的威胁。但是，与后来的投资者相比，投资者的投资者甚至低于公共买家的成本基础，也可以确保其上涨。这意味着，后来回合的买家损失可能仍会为最早的令牌持有人带来收益 - 在项目的代币经济中造成不公平的失衡。

Poor Vesting Schedule

归属时间表差

Far too many projects turn their public buyers into exit liquidity for early investors and insiders. Nothing destroys community faster than watching early insiders dump tokens while public buyers hold withering bags.

太多的项目将其公共买家转变为早期投资者和内部人士的出口流动性。没有什么比看早期内部人员倾倒令牌更快的速度，而公众买家拿着枯萎的袋子。

The timing of unlocks is also pivotal. While a long vesting and lockup schedule seems good for value appreciation, they almost always guarantee predictable sell pressure as investors who’ve been forced to hold for too long scramble to unload. Fast unlocks may provide rapid price discovery and expand the token holder base, but they also allow whales to dump, creating “red candles” and evaporating public confidence.

解锁的时机也很重要。尽管较长的归属和锁定时间表似乎有益于价值升值，但它们几乎总是保证可预测的卖出压力，因为那些被迫长期努力争取卸载的投资者。快速解锁可能会提供快速的价格发现并扩大令牌持有人基础，但它们还允许鲸鱼倾倒，创建“红色蜡烛”并蒸发公众的信心。

Overselling by Founders

创始人的过度销售

Sometimes the prospect of turning recently minted digital tokens into real value is too tempting for the founders who created them. I’ve watched projects go from great ideas to publicly traded at over a billion USD in valuation, minting multi-millionaire founders in the process. Even the most disciplined of them are tempted to sell their holdings and trade their project tokens for cash.

有时，将最近将数字代币转变为实际价值的前景对于创建它们的创始人来说太诱人了。我看过项目从估值超过10亿美元的公开交易的项目转变为公开交易，在此过程中造成了数百万富翁的创始人。即使是最有纪律的人也很想出售其股份并将其项目代币交易。

Take for instance Mantra, which suddenly lost 92% of its value in just 90 minutes. Despite statements by the CEO to the contrary, blockchain analysts were quick to identify substantial insider movements of at least USD 227 million onto exchanges, suggesting an insider dump.

例如，咒语突然在短短90分钟内突然失去了其价值的92％。尽管首席执行官对相反的陈述，但区块链分析师迅速确定了至少2.27亿美元在交易所的内幕运动，这暗示了内部人士。

High Listing Valuation

高清单估值

Founders are often enticed to list at larger valuations as they make for bigger headlines, raised optics and build hype. Founders are not entirely at fault here, as even Binance has been known to push out unusually high listing valuations, with projects like Hamster Kombat (HMSTR) listing at over USD 700 million in market cap, and Notcoin listing at a staggering USD 1 billion at launch.

创始人通常会吸引更大的估值列出，因为他们成为更大的头条新闻，凸起的光学和建造炒作。创始人在这里并不完全是错的，因为甚至binance都众所周知，汉堡（HMSTR）列表的估值异常高，市场上限超过7亿美元，而NotCoin列出了诸如启动时惊人地的10亿美元。

But overvalued project listings create a lot of “air” underneath them, and when everyone is in the money, it’s almost a guaranteed race to the bottom and token holders are quick to cash out to get more favorable pricing than the person next to them. A high starting valuation also means the prospect of public buyers earning a multiple on their investment is slimmer, thinning out secondary market demand. When you have a lot of holders selling and nobody to buy, the result is an eventual death spiral.

但是，高估的项目列表在它们下面创造了许多“空气”，当每个人都赚钱时，几乎可以保证，这是一场底部的竞赛，而代币持有人可以很快兑现，以获得比旁边的人更有利的定价。高的开始估值还意味着公共买家在投资上获得倍数的前景很小，从而减少了二级市场需求。当您有很多持有者出售并且没有人要购买时，结果是最终的死亡螺旋。

While projects like Hamster Kombat set industry engagement records, and listed on the top exchanges in the world, its overvalue at listing resulted in a 87% price decline to its recorded all-time-low.

虽然像仓鼠Kombat这样的项目设定了行业参与记录，并在全球顶级交流中列出，但其列表的溢价导致价格下降了87％，至其记录的历史最低点。

What Actually Works in Tokenomics

真正在令牌学中起作用的是什么

BTC and ETH hold the top market cap positions for good reason. Beyond being early, they’ve demonstrated several core principles that separate sustainable token models from hollow speculation vehicles.

BTC和ETH持有最高的市值，这是有充分理由的。除了早期，他们还展示了几个核心原则，这些原则将可持续的代币模型与空心投机工具分开。

Genuine Scarcity

真正的稀缺

Bitcoin’s 21 million fixed supply cap isn’t powerful just because it’s scarce—it’s powerful because the market believes with absolute certainty that this limit won’t change.

比特币的2100万个固定供应上限并不是因为它很少，这很强大，因为市场绝对可以确定该限制不会改变。

Deep Product Integration

深层产品集成

The fundamental question every project should answer honestly: Could your product function without a token? If yes, you’re likely forcing tokenization where it doesn’t belong.

每个项目都应该诚实地回答的基本问题：您的产品功能是否可以没有令牌？如果是，您可能会在不属于的情况下强制执政化。

Projects like Filecoin embody this principle well—their token is essential to the network’s storage marketplace function, making it nearly impossible to separate the product from its token. By contrast, projects that bolt on tokens as afterthoughts typically see their tokens wither in value over time.

诸如Filecoin之类的项目体现了这一原则 - 您的令牌对于网络的存储市场功能至关重要，因此几乎不可能将产品与代币分开。相比之下，随着事后的想法，将螺栓固定在代币上的预测通常会随着时间的推移而有价值。

Selling Restrictions

出售限制

Projects should structure valuations across each sale round with reduced spread and design a lockup schedule that prevents lower-priced buyers from “dumping” their tokens on participants in later rounds.

项目应在每个销售回合中构建估值，并减少点差和设计锁定时间表，以防止低价买家在以后的回合中“倾销”其令牌。