Weaknesses to cope with?

What weaknesses do we as a community have to cope with?

If we implement the proposed idea of a Token Studio,…

  • What own weaknesses do we have to consider. How?
  • How do these impact the given proposal?
  • (examples: group think, overestimating, wishful thinking, blind spots, …)

Comment on weaknesses here by directly replying to this post.
Use the dedicated threads for:


Okay first of all the transfer less payment idea is fantastic!
As for these multiple tokens. I am not a fan.

Weaknesses/Threats: Few videos ago we talked about how we wanted to slash the rewards, because we didn’t have enough to properly reward the developers and people on the team. But now we will multiply their job by 2/3/4x? Each of these tokens will need their own marketing teams. Not to mention people to handle support and bug fixing.
Also you have mentioned that it will benefit XIO token holders, which I think is true at the start (with the airdrops) but what about after? What will keep XIO’s price up?
Nothing about $Flash or $Aqua says anything about XIO. How will Flash help XIO keep it value after its launched?
We have talked previously about how the flashstaking will be combined with the treasury (I admit I don’t remember all the details) but I remember that flashstaking would increase the amount of XIO in the treasury and therefor create a minimum price threshold. Will that all be gone now?
Also I think it splits our potential buyers. If we only had XIO anyone who would want to use any of these services would buy XIO and increase the price. Now they will buy only one token (for that particular service) and all the other tokens won’t gain in price.

Strengths: 1) The airdrop system. This should increase the XIO price before any airdrop.
2) The value independence. As I mentioned above I would much prefer one token, but I can see that a benefit would be, that as XIO holder I don’t really need to care whether AQUA will be successful or not. If the price of AQUA goes down then I still have my XIO.

Still it feels to me like XIO’S price will be great while you launch projects. What about when you stop? With this system, the moment you stop making new projects (or pause for a while), there is nothing holding its price up. As opposed to if the projects were XIO’s, they would hold the price up themselves.

Anyway I will stop now before the post gets way too long.
Summary: I worry about spreading ourselves thin and XIO price.

1 Like

I believe step 3, frequent 50k plus pool new token drops will keep the xio up.
If several projects succeed XIO should go up because people believe they can join the next train. If track record is poor price should go down.

Edit: Just read the rest of your long post and see we share this view :wink:

1 Like

Hmm I am probably narrow minded here, but let’s assume 80% of XIO is owned by 20% of citizens all the small investors evaluation almost does not count and evidence of for interest is highly dependent on the judgement of whales.

I also see difficulties in doing a responsible due diligence. If ones share is little one could not consider it worthwhile and just sell tokens quickly regardless the prospect of the project.

How do you define evidence that the product has no interest?

i think the poor reach of our facebook and other social paltforms. The xio network is really big, yet our followers are few in numbers. There are scam projects with more followers and i wonder why :face_with_raised_eyebrow:

well, fewr people equals fewer capitals and price action

maybe hire a social media manager wich will work only on our social platforms

I fear that the ecosystem is becoming too complicated too fast. I know XIO leadership is aware of this, and that flash token is a way to simplify things. However, adding a token adds its own complexity even if it leads to simpler organizational concepts down the line. I’ve been part of a few projects (although none so much as XIO) and when they add a token it becomes that much harder to keep up.

Its not to say we shouldn’t do it, just that a lot of energy should be focused on making the concepts as understandable as possible, knowing that we are starting from a relatively complex place.


In the long run XIO might lose its value proposition as lesser and lesser new project come in to existence. Because there won’t be a reason to hold XIO in the long run in my understanding.
To prevent that as we gain experience we should be onboarding external start-ups as well.

1 Like

I don’t think this is much of an issue. The core team would not be focusing on the development and marketing for these new projects. The slides and video mention that the community would come up with the ideas and then someone inside the community would be elected to run the project and make all the decisions. I assume this also means the developers and team members would be chosen from the community. I think some clarification here would be great though… @ZacharyDash

I feel like this idea might be scrapped now. I don’t really see how this would work anymore if we are having a dedicated token just for flash staking. I could be wrong…

+1. These are very good points and also concerns of mine.

I am pretty sure we will be seeing a new social media manager in the coming week or two :slight_smile:

1 Like

the weakness is that a community must be driven, there’s no way to get something without a regulation. It’ll be very difficult to collect and valuate every ideas. Maybe with voting we can do cool things.

I have concerns about the price stability and sustainability of $XIO, as the main value driver with the proposed solution is flashdrops and nothing else.
The XLP is in my view a measure to make it possible to provide liquidity. Without the XLP the impermanent loss would make it unsustainable, so this is not a value driver in itself. It is simply a better way to support the project, than simply holding ones $XIO.

The Foundation receiving flashdrops and nothing else when launching new coins is in itself a great motivator and in part quiets my doubts.
However, my doubts are not primarily in the Foundation “getting to big a slice of the pie”, but rather how they will stay motivated, as well as properly funded and this is dependent on the new eco-systems tokenomics working out.

I am thus eagerly awaiting the results of the discussions and feedback on this SWOT and hopefully we will all be happy about the outcome.

First of all , I love the way XIO is shaping its future to really become to “token studio” of choice for launching new ideas to the decentralized world. Few things which might need reconsideration/more thoughts/ potential weakness are:


  1. XIO vault needs to worked out again…without flash feeding XIO, how to ensure the base price for XIO(sustainably)?
  2. Closed system to start with - The fully community developed tokens are good to start with, but should be opened in the long run.
  3. Audit of all new projects/codes : Defensibility against rug pulls and hacks needs to be thought through for each new token.

Most of the scam projects are having huge social media following via airdrop sites, and most of the followers are bots or people only talking about price action. And spamming the groups.

Zach and team members are always listening to citizens in the telegram or here, and take part in conversation. I have always seen improvement/changing made on community feedback

I have watched video multiple times now and i am still not able to make up my mind on why we need so many tokens ?? I love the idea of having to grow ourself first before we situate ourself in a solid position to be ableto help startup but do we really need that many tokens ? Why can’t one (or two token ) do it all ?

My biggest worry is we are flooding the market/users with so many tokens and info that it will be too complicated for people to keep up with and loose interest. Also as another user mentioned, this add a LOT of work for the team , developing/deploying/support/social etc… XIO itself has 5-6 diff telegram groups and now we are talking about 4-5 more new tokens.

I think it’s only a 3 months problem.
After the airdrop, both projects will be 100% independant.
So people won’t have to think about why is there 2 tokens: in their mind it will be 2 different projects, so it’s quite normal to have 2 different projects.

XIO is an incubator.
People will know if/when succesfull projects has been launched by XIO and will then buy tokens to get the next airdrop.
Why do you think the new projects would have an end?
They can keep launching new projects in an infinite way.
We can imaging some teams join and pay somehow to get incubated and launched within the XIO ecosystem later.
So it could be a long term success.

  • although money isnt everything, alot of people here are for economic success.
    So team should keep in mind about price on every decision they take (long term wise).

  • Small number of quality tokens >>>> large number of low quality tokens
    We only mint when when we are 100% confident in its Tokenomics, no bugs etc
    Because if we make a mistake in one token we lose confidence in all tokens/future tokens

  • no need to rush, the more tokens we put out the more the liability on the project.
    Also the more toekns we put out the thinner our ability fets to innovative, bugs fix, community control each token.
    Slow and steady wins the race!

Cheers :slightly_smiling_face:

For me I think a key weakness about the XIO studio will be sustainability.

  1. How to maintain and manage projects which are accepted and successfully launched from the studio as this will bring extra work on the team and citizenry. We are also supposed to make sure that after launch these projects don’t die but rather remain hot in the ecosystem.

  2. How to make sure the studio keeps getting smart ideas to build upon consistently. Here if for a while say 8 months, getting to a year and there’s nothing on the table being worked upon in the studio people might loose interest. So just as Binance makes sure the keep launching great projects on their launchpad, the xio studio must be consistent with it’s work in building and launching great projects.

1 Like

You are welcome to continue commenting.

+1 on both points, I agree completely

1 Like