Hey guys, being an IDO investors and believer in Uno, these 2 years have been an amzing journey. I have seen how the team lead by Jas and Sujith has truly grown. We have been through thick and thin together, bull and bear, FOMO and FUD seasons etc.
Unore has definitely grown so much and adopted very well throughout these 2 years, namely reinsurance, direct insurance, metaverse/nft, stabecoin depeg coverage, RWA, insured audit and now DAO.
As we all know the tokenomics were setup in the beginning for the initial directions. However as we have now adapt and made amazing changes along the way, should we relook into the tokenomics to see what we could do better?
By looking at this pie chart, the largest portion of tokenomics was allocated to Reinusrance cell/liqudity 31%, followed by Marketing Expenses of 12%. Operation Expenses has also been allocated of 8% of the tokenomics. I believe these tokenomics was definitely a great one based on initial plans. However as time goes by, Jas and Sujith has truly outperformed my personal expectation by the recent insure audit deals they secured. They have secured 5 audit deals generating a $100k revenue and this is just a start! And there seems to be 12 or 18 pending ones waiting to be finalised? Imagine the amount of revenue the team is bring in.
That said, given that now Unore has became a profit generating project, could we use these profits to fund the marketing, operating expenses etc. Thus the need of emitting additional tokens from the supply is not neccessary. On top of that, this would also be more sustainable for Unore to run as a business and not relying on liquidating tokens in order order to generate funds.
As Jas has mentioned a number of times regarding Circulating Supply, there isn’t a need to increase it if it’s unnecessary. Instead it would be better to keep it deflationary, ie. buy back and burn. That said, from an investor point of view (especially the new one), when they look into tokenomics and see a CS 75 million out of 384m total supply, they would have a fear of more emission of tokens down the road as it’s only 20% being in circulation.
Now the question is, if there isn’t a need of that much tokens, would it be a good idea if we reduced the total supply to let’s say 200m or 300m (just some random numbers)? By burning that huge amount of tokens, Uno would become more scarse and the price would definitely increase in value. So take for example if there is a need for CEX listing/marketing etc, instead of providing them 1m Uno ($0.06), it would be 100k Uno ($0.6) instead.
Of course these numbers are just assumption in a positive manner, i believe the team would be able to come out with a better projection on what is feasible and workable. As there is no turning back after reducing the total supply, we ought to consider the pros and cons of such action.
In conclusion, a profit generating project like Unore is the key of sustainability. Unlike many other projects which focuses on diluting it tokens price for funding, it will not be sustainable.
This is why we need a new schedule…so we can share it on twitter…