2026-01-07 19:26:22

Let's talk about a detail that many people tend to overlook—the true value behind DAO tokens.

When comparing LISTA to other DAOs, you'll notice an interesting structural difference: most governance tokens only give you the right to modify parameters, essentially voting rights. But veLISTA is different; it actually allows you to directly control the protocol's cash flow.

What does this mean? Holding veLISTA isn't just for participating in votes; more importantly, it enables you to share in the protocol's real earnings—lending interest, minting fees, liquidation penalties—all of which are tangible money. Compared to the simple "buyback and burn" logic, veLISTA's design is more like an unsecuritized preferred stock model.

Another key detail is the maximum lock-up period of 52 weeks. This design isn't arbitrary. It forces participants to establish a long-term interest binding with the protocol to truly enjoy value capture. As a result, short-term speculators are naturally filtered out, leaving those who genuinely believe in the protocol. Structurally, this acts as a cleansing of speculative elements from the market.

Of course, every mechanism has its dual aspects; the above is just my personal analysis and reflection.

LISTA-0,58%

View Original

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.

13 Likes

Reward
13
10
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

LonelyAnchorman

· 15h ago

Wow, this is what true value capture looks like, not those vague governance rights.

View OriginalReply0

SocialFiQueen

· 19h ago

Well... a 52-week lock-in directly discouraged me. Isn't this just a disguised way of harvesting profits from retail investors?

View OriginalReply0

EyeOfTheTokenStorm

· 20h ago

A 52-week lock-up is indeed a tough move, but those who truly make money are always the earliest to get on board. Later entrants? Hehe. From my quantitative model, the cash flow distribution logic of veLISTA is indeed a level above ordinary governance tokens. But the key question is—can the protocol’s revenue be sustained? Don’t be fooled by the term "non-securitized preferred stock"; historical data shows that such lock-up mechanisms tend to become liquidity traps in the end. Honestly, I’m a bit tempted, but we need to see more technical signals before jumping into this rally. Let's observe first, wait until the bottoming pattern becomes more obvious before making a T. Everyone wants to be a long-term holder, but when the coin price drops 30%, is your conviction still there? No one can escape the market cycle. No matter how well the structure is designed, it can’t withstand the absolute decline of the coin price… that’s the cruelest reality.

View OriginalReply0

SelfCustodyIssues

· 01-08 05:25

Oh, so that's the difference between veLISTA and other governance tokens. It's not just voting rights; it directly distributes cash flow. That's the real value.

View OriginalReply0

SeeYouInFourYears

· 01-07 19:55

This is the real value capture, not just the superficial voting rights.

View OriginalReply0

GateUser-7b078580

· 01-07 19:51

Data shows that the 52-week lock-in design can indeed filter out a large number of speculators, but how many actually stick around until the profits are realized... The observed pattern is that most people cannot withstand the first bear market cycle.

View OriginalReply0

GasWastingMaximalist

· 01-07 19:47

52-week lock-up? Isn't this just a disguised way to harvest retail investors, under the guise of "filtering speculators"? The result is locking up liquidity.

View OriginalReply0

Liquidated_Larry