Mike (@levysmith23) profile picture

Tokenomics Architect 🏗️ I stress-test your tokenomics before your TGE breaks them. 36-month simulations. Cliff risks. Liquidity traps. DM first.

Joined October 2020
Photo by Mike (@levysmith23)Photo by Mike (@levysmith23)Photo by Mike (@levysmith23)Photo by Mike (@levysmith23)Photo by Mike (@levysmith23)Photo by Mike (@levysmith23)Photo by Mike (@levysmith23)Photo by Mike (@levysmith23)
78.2M to 272.8M $SOLAR in 12 months. That's +249% supply expansion in my stress-test model of @solarious_us. Float goes from 7.82% to 27.28%, and none of that growth comes from VC or team tokens. Here's what the cliff does after 👇
8
3
4
172
1/7 17B to ~75B $MTAUR in 6 months. That's +341% supply expansion in my stress-test model of @minotaurus_io. Assumptions: presale 10% at TGE, rest vested over 6 months. Here's where the liquidity pressure builds, and 3 levers to fix it 👇
6
39
7/7 I build and stress-test custom 36-month token models to catch liquidity bottlenecks and architectural flaws BEFORE protocols go live. Launching a project or need your tokenomics audited? DM me here or on TG: t.me/mikerickray
43
6/7 My Verdict: The core math is clean, but $MTAUR relies heavily on massive player acquisition in its first 180 days. If sinks are deployed early, the steep drop in post-Month 6 emissions sets up a strong foundation for long-term scarcity.
9
5/7 3 ways to fix the H1 liquidity trap: Gamified Staking: Offer high-yield soft-staking before TGE to defer claims. Sink Demand: Require $MTAUR for key assets on Day 1. Milestone Vesting: Shift linear unlocks to active player growth triggers
22
4/7 The Upside: If liquidity survives the H1 trial-by-fire, post-Month 6 emissions plummet 86%, from ~9.8B down to ~1.35B tokens per month. The supply curve flattens until full distribution at Month 25.
1
7
3/7 The Bottleneck: Between Month 1 and Month 6, monthly unlocks run ~9.0B to ~9.8B $MTAUR, almost all from presale vesting. Without aggressive Day-1 utility sinks, secondary market liquidity pools will be forced to absorb continuous sell pressure from early claims.
6
2/7 The model assumptions: • Max Supply: 100B $MTAUR • Day-1 TGE Float: 17B (17%) • Presale: 60% of supply, 10% at TGE, 6-month vesting • Game Rewards 20%, Team & Devs 10%, Liquidity 10% With 60% of supply held by presale buyers, Month 1-6 vesting dictates token survival.
18
7/7 I build and stress-test custom multi-year token models to catch liquidity bottlenecks and architectural flaws BEFORE protocols go live. Launching a project or need your tokenomics audited? DM me here or on TG: t.me/mikerickray
40
6/7 My Verdict: The math holds up. Year 1 dilution comes from ecosystem, reserve and validator emissions, not insiders, and the cliff adds a modest step after that. The bigger question is whether demand can absorb a 3.5x float in Year 1.
1
28
5/7 3 design levers tested in this model: • Zero Private Inflation (H1): Protects early liquidity pools. • Long-Term Network Sinks: Stretches rewards over 120 months. • Delayed VC Vesting: Aligns long-term holder incentives.
31
4/7 The Cliff: Private/VC (15%) and Team (8%) release nothing new through Month 12. Of the ~194.6M added in Year 1, none comes from them. At Month 13 vesting starts: monthly emissions step from ~16.2M to ~18.8M $SOLAR (+16%) as VC and Team start and Reserves finish.
29
3/7 The Year 1 Buffer: In this custom test, VC (10% unlocked at TGE) and Team tokens sit behind a 12-month cliff. With no new insider unlocks in Year 1, liquidity pools only absorb steady emissions from ecosystem, reserve, validator and producer allocations.
1
35
2/7 The model baseline: • Max Supply: 1B $SOLAR • Day-1 TGE Float: ~78.2M (7.82%) • Initial MC / FDV: $5.865M / $75M • Primary Driver: Ecosystem & Validators hold 59.5% A tight ~7.8% float gives it strong early price agility out of the gate..
38
7/7 I stress-test multi-year token models to catch liquidity bottlenecks BEFORE they break protocol price action. Launching a project or need your tokenomics audited? DM me here or on TG: t.me/mikerickray
1
17
6/7 My Verdict: $HUMA's PayFi product generates real utility, but managing the Month-18 cliff requires aggressive fee-capture scaling before VC and team supply hits the market
42
5/7 3 Architectural Fixes for HUMA: 1. Protocol Fee Sinks: Route real PayFi transaction fees into open-marketHUMA buybacks. 2. Extended Lock Multipliers: Tier APY by lock duration (6-24mo). 3. Utility Gates: Require asset originators to stake $HUMA against borrowing limits
36
4/7 The Bottleneck (Month 18): At Month 18, both Investor (20.6%) and Team (19.3%) cliff locks expire simultaneously. Monthly unlock rates surge, releasing tens of millions of tokens per quarter directly into secondary liquidity pools.
3
3/7 The Emission Engine: Huma uses quarterly decaying releases for LP incentives (-7% decay rate). While this curbs early inflation, settlement yield is paid in stablecoins, leaving $HUMA exposed if token demand sinks lag behind emissions.
45
2/7 The Baseline Architecture: • Max Supply: 10B $HUMA • Day-1 TGE Float: ~17.33% (1.73B tokens) • Allocation: LPs/Ecosystem (31%), Investors (20.6%), Team (19.3%) • Value Sink: Staking for PayFi pool access & yield multipliers.
29