✍️ By: A Concerned Pioneer

 Introduction

The Pi Network has built a massive global community under the promise of decentralized, inclusive digital currency. With millions of Pioneers actively mining Pi and engaging in its evolving ecosystem, expectations are high for meaningful economic and technological strategies. However, recent actions—particularly the Pi Core Team’s large-scale buyback of Pi Coin—raise questions about the maturity and sustainability of its approach.

From a scholarly perspective, buyback strategies appear not only unsustainable but also disappointingly superficial, especially in a space built on innovation and decentralization. This article aims to explore why such moves are perceived as inadequate, and what more credible, decentralized alternatives exist.

Why Buyback Strategies Fall Short

1. Lack of Economic Sophistication

Buybacks are a rudimentary financial tactic, often used in traditional markets to stabilize a stock's price. But in a crypto-economic context, they fail to reflect the deeper dynamics of tokenomics, community incentives, and ecosystem growth. Scholars expect innovation—not repetition of fiat-era finance techniques.

2. Contradiction to Blockchain Philosophy

The foundation of blockchain technology is decentralization. When the Core Team alone dictates supply and demand dynamics by buying back tokens, it centralizes power and violates the principle of democratized control. Such actions draw Pi dangerously close to centralized finance (CeFi), undermining its own vision.

3. No Creation of Real Utility

The real value of any cryptocurrency comes from its utility—how and where it can be used. A buyback doesn’t add utility. It doesn’t help Pi integrate into payment systems, power dApps, or interact with DeFi protocols. Without utility, a token’s value remains speculative.

4. Temporary Price Influence

Buybacks can temporarily influence price through artificial scarcity or inflated demand. However, without sustainable economic models, the value created is fragile. Scholars argue this is more illusion than progress—a short-term fix to a long-term problem.

A More Scholarly and Sustainable Solution: Liquidity Pools on DEXs

Instead of controlling supply through buybacks, Pi Core Team should empower the community by enabling liquidity pools on decentralized exchanges (DEXs). This approach reflects true decentralization and allows real market forces to establish Pi’s value.

Benefits of DEX Liquidity Pools:

  • Decentralized Price Discovery: Market participants, not a central team, determine the value of Pi.

  • Community-Driven Growth: Pioneers take ownership of Pi’s ecosystem.

  • Real DeFi Integration: Pi becomes usable in swaps, staking, farming, and lending.

  • Sustainable Participation: Liquidity providers earn rewards, encouraging long-term holding and ecosystem support.

By allowing Pi to be paired with stablecoins like USDT or USDC, Pi gains real-world value. Integrating with DEXs like PancakeSwap or Uniswap also opens doors to cross-chain innovation and greater visibility in the broader crypto market.

What Scholars Want from Pi Network

  • Transparent Tokenomics: Clear communication on supply, unlock schedules, and economic goals.

  • Open Market Access: Removal of mainnet restrictions to allow external wallet transfers.

  • Incentive Mechanisms: Sustainable rewards that promote holding, staking, and usage.

  • Decentralized Governance: Allow community voting on key decisions—true DAO integration.

  • Real Utility Cases: Let Pi be used in commerce, services, dApps, and smart contracts.

Conclusion: Pi Network Must Evolve

While the buyback may have been introduced with good intentions, it reflects a top-down, centralized mindset that contradicts the decentralized spirit of cryptocurrency. Scholars and informed Pioneers do not seek temporary fixes—they seek systems that are self-sustaining, decentralized, and utility-driven.