I remember seeing a token spike right after listing and thinking it was coming from real usage. Later, it felt more like positioning than actual activity. That was the moment I started paying closer attention to what was really being traded.
With $SIGN , it doesn’t feel like the core asset is data. It feels like it’s control over proof.
At first, I thought sovereign systems would compete based on who owns the most data. Now I see it differently. Data is heavy, messy, and hard to move. Proof is lighter. If institutions can issue an attestation once and have it reused across multiple systems, the edge shifts away from data ownership and toward control of valid proof.
But the economics only work if that proof is used again and again. One-off proofs do not create lasting demand.
The system needs repeated verification, real dependency between participants, and maybe even some form of reputation or capital staked behind those proofs.
If supply grows faster than that demand, the price will drift. I’ve seen that happen before.
So the real question is pretty simple: are proofs being reused, or are they being recreated every time?
If reuse starts compounding, this begins to look like real infrastructure. If not, it stays just a strong narrative.