#美联储回购协议计划 $UNI This wave of governance upgrades is definitely worth taking a look at.
The recently approved proposal involves a significant scale—1.25 billion UNI tokens were almost unanimously approved, with only 7.42 votes against. This voting result actually indicates that the ecosystem consensus remains quite solid. The subsequent plan includes burning 1 billion tokens, along with launching protocol fees and a continuous burn mechanism. From a tokenomics perspective, this combination indeed changes the fundamental logic.
The interesting part is that the protocol itself has evolved from a "pure trading tool" into an "asset that generates cash flow," but the market's reaction to this shift still seems to be in the digestion phase, and the price has not kept pace with the improvement in fundamentals. Such mismatches usually don't last long historically, and early movers often benefit from this time lag.
Along with macro liquidity policies like Federal Reserve repurchase agreements, the risk appetite across the entire crypto market is also changing. It's worth observing in the short term, but from a fundamental and valuation perspective, the current entry point offers a pretty good risk-reward ratio. 💭
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
10 Likes
Reward
10
7
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
GmGmNoGn
· 11h ago
Wow, the level of consensus is just too crazy—only 7 opposition votes? This pace is incredible.
The ecological consensus is so strong, but the price hasn't gone up yet. Let's wait and see if we can catch the bottom.
With both destruction and protocol fees working together, UNI is really turning into a cash flow machine now.
The market response is always a bit slow, but this time, the arbitrage is truly rewarding.
View OriginalReply0
TradFiRefugee
· 11h ago
Hmm... 125 million tokens approved unanimously, indicating that the centripetal force of the Uniswap ecosystem is indeed still there.
The dual-track system of burn + fee distribution, at first glance, resembles the cash flow model of traditional finance. No wonder we TradFi refugees find it a bit familiar.
The key is that the price hasn't reacted yet; misalignment indeed exists.
View OriginalReply0
OptionWhisperer
· 11h ago
Wow, there are only a little over 7 opposition votes? The level of consensus is really strong. It feels like UNI is definitely about to rise this time.
View OriginalReply0
ProveMyZK
· 11h ago
Wow, only 7.42 UNI opposition votes out of 125 million? The level of consensus is incredible, feels like it's about to take off.
View OriginalReply0
VitalikFanboy42
· 11h ago
Damn, the voting consistency is this high, and there are only 7 opposition votes? The ecosystem is indeed tightly bound.
View OriginalReply0
WhaleSurfer
· 11h ago
Damn, the voting results are too outrageous, 7.42 votes against? Basically passed unanimously.
Entering now is indeed cost-effective, but I'm still waiting for a dip... afraid of chasing the high.
The destruction mechanism is pretty good; it all depends on whether it can really pick up.
The slow price response might actually be a signal? Feels like someone is holding back a big move.
Whenever the Federal Reserve changes policies, cryptocurrencies tend to follow suit. I'm almost used to it, haha.
I just want to ask, is it really safe now? Does anyone have friends who have already gone all-in?
This upgrade to the protocol looks good, but I still don't dare to go all-in.
View OriginalReply0
NFTPessimist
· 12h ago
Another story of "solid consensus," with only 7 opposing votes, is that called unanimous agreement? Is this data lying, or is there something wrong with my aesthetic judgment?
What I truly can't understand is why the price hasn't caught up, even though the fundamentals have improved. That clearly indicates the market doesn't believe in this cash flow story.
The dual-track destruction system sounds impressive, but can UNI really generate meaningful cash flow? I remain skeptical.
Wait, is this a signal that they are about to start harvesting profits? Those optimistic are all talking about the entry cost performance.
#美联储回购协议计划 $UNI This wave of governance upgrades is definitely worth taking a look at.
The recently approved proposal involves a significant scale—1.25 billion UNI tokens were almost unanimously approved, with only 7.42 votes against. This voting result actually indicates that the ecosystem consensus remains quite solid. The subsequent plan includes burning 1 billion tokens, along with launching protocol fees and a continuous burn mechanism. From a tokenomics perspective, this combination indeed changes the fundamental logic.
The interesting part is that the protocol itself has evolved from a "pure trading tool" into an "asset that generates cash flow," but the market's reaction to this shift still seems to be in the digestion phase, and the price has not kept pace with the improvement in fundamentals. Such mismatches usually don't last long historically, and early movers often benefit from this time lag.
Along with macro liquidity policies like Federal Reserve repurchase agreements, the risk appetite across the entire crypto market is also changing. It's worth observing in the short term, but from a fundamental and valuation perspective, the current entry point offers a pretty good risk-reward ratio. 💭