Formanite 福尔曼特

La maggior parte delle discussioni relative alla blockchain Layer-1 ripetono i concetti di TPS, tempo di blocco e grafici. Credo che questo sia un punto di vista errato da parte di Fogo. Più lo esamino, più diventa evidente che Fogo è in realtà un progetto di struttura di mercato avvolto in un Layer-1.

Quello che sto cercando di dire è questo; la velocità non è l'obiettivo di Fogo. È destinato a garantire che il trading on-chain sia più equo e pulito trasformando il matching delle transazioni. Questa è un'ambizione che non si limita a professare di avere bassa latenza, ma è come funziona realmente il mercato: prima, esecuzione; secondo, marketing.

What actually forces someone to get VANRY. What makes them hold it instead of flipping it. And when activity grows, does the token really capture that value or does it quietly leak somewhere else?

Vanar is clear about the basics. VANRY is the native token. You need it for transaction fees and smart contract execution. It is also used in staking through a delegated proof of stake model, where holders stake and validators earn rewards for securing the network.

So VANRY has two clear jobs. One is being spent for blockspace and execution. The other is being locked for security and participation.

But having utility is not enough. The real work is mapping the loop from demand creation to value capture.

It starts with usage. Every time someone moves an asset, triggers a contract, updates onchain state, or does anything the chain must process, gas is required. Gas is priced in VANRY. So real activity creates recurring demand that does not depend on hype. It depends on people actually doing things.

That baseline demand matters. But it is rarely enough on its own.

In consumer ecosystems like gaming, metaverse experiences, and brand activations, users often do not even see gas. Apps may sponsor fees or bundle costs to remove friction. That is where the loop either becomes strong or starts leaking.

Who is the real recurring buyer of VANRY when usage grows. Is it thousands of users buying small amounts. Or a handful of operators buying in bulk and treating it like operating cost.

If demand is broad across users, it is usually healthier and less coordinated. If demand is concentrated in operators, it can still be large, but it becomes price sensitive. Operators hedge. They optimize. They adjust activity when costs rise. That can weaken the link between usage growth and token demand even if the chain is busier.

Now add the second role. Staking.

VANRY is tied to validator incentives and delegated proof of stake. That creates a holding channel. Tokens get locked. Supply comes off the market. The token starts looking more like productive capital instead of just fuel.

But staking only strengthens value capture if the reward source is healthy.

If rewards mainly come from inflation, validators may sell to cover costs. That creates steady pressure. If rewards come more from real usage and fees, security is funded by actual activity instead of dilution. The stronger version of this story is when usage grows enough that emissions matter less over time.

Vanar also positions itself as more than just a base chain. It talks about AI infrastructure for Web3. That changes the potential structure of demand. A simple Layer 1 mostly captures value through blockspace demand. A stacked infrastructure model can create paid services and recurring revenue streams.

If those paid services route through VANRY, the token captures value from more than just gas.

One clear attempt to close the loop is the buyback and burn framework. Paid subscriptions convert into VANRY and trigger buy events. That is designed to prevent the common leak where products earn revenue but the token sees none of it. If this mechanism is consistent and visible, it becomes structural. If it is occasional, it feels more like a campaign.

You can break VANRY demand into three layers.

First is usage demand. The spend layer. Gas and smart contract execution consume VANRY. If daily activity becomes habitual, this layer becomes steady and boring in the best way.

Second is holding demand. Staking and validator participation reduce liquid supply and align long term incentives. But if rewards are too emission heavy and constantly sold, the system needs endless new demand just to stay balanced.

Third is speculative demand. Expectations about future growth. It will always exist. But it only helps when it bridges into real usage and value routing. If speculation runs too far ahead for too long, volatility increases and the token starts behaving more like sentiment than utility.

When activity scales, the value flow question becomes simple.

More transactions mean more fees in VANRY. That forces either more buyers or more frequent replenishment by operators. More value secured means stronger reasons to stake and support validators.

If higher layer product revenue consistently converts into VANRY through buybacks and burns, scaling usage can directly increase token capture instead of leaving value outside the system.

Leakage is also predictable.

It happens if all gas is sponsored by a few operators who optimize purchases. It happens if premium services are paid in ways that do not reliably convert into VANRY. It happens if emissions dominate rewards and constant selling overwhelms organic demand. It happens if price action is driven mostly by trading flows disconnected from real usage.

So the conditions for VANRY to win are not complicated.

Product usage must look like habit, not campaign. VANRY must be required for that growth, directly or indirectly. Revenue routing into the token must be consistent. Staking must scale without creating endless sell pressure. Builders must keep shipping apps that generate daily actions, not one time spikes.

In the last 24 hours, there was no clear new headline announcement. The signal looks more like continued building around fees, staking, and the revenue conversion loop, while products and developer pathways keep expanding in the background.

If you want a simple daily framework, it stays the same.

Is real usage growing in a way that repeats. Is VANRY truly required for that growth rather than abstracted away. And is the value created being captured by the token through fees, committed supply, and consistent conversion, or is it leaking through emissions, external payments, or optimized sponsorship structures.

Those questions are boring. But they are the ones that decide if a good week on the chart turns into something that actually lasts.

#vanar @Vanarchain $VANRY
{spot}(VANRYUSDT)