While a small maximum supply sounds appealing for security and price action, it also comes at the cost of alienating farmers, cutting off the income to the developer wallet, and losing precious liquidity. To counter that, we can provide incentive for LP holders with new developments, especially given enough time. However, we could also control circulating supply by adding more and more deflationary mechanisms AND keep the farm going forever.

---

---

Option #1

End farm soon. ~200k cap.

Max Supply @ 200,000 tokens or soonest available multiple of 1000 after that.

PROS

1. Easy as π. People get it, even equate max supply to deflationary.
2. $$$$ HODL Potential. Highest price potential per market cap.
3. Good Price Action. No more inflation causing sell pressure.
4. Great Trust & Security. Less central control. Developer can't decide to change the emissions. No opportunity for minting exploits or rugs.
5. Utility Not as Required. Community and brand can be focus over developing utility to combat inflation.
6. Low Stress on Development. Developer is not on the clock to come out with buyback & burn mechanisms.
7. New Investors. A new style of investors called HODLers will see this as an opportunity and buy up the token as a security to hedge against inflationary currencies.

CONS

1. Low Liquidity. Liquidity for trading will suck, since it no longer is being rewarded by the farm.
2. Fixed Budget. Budgetary income is gone. Dev wallet no longer gets new tokens or deposit fees for burns, marketing, developments, and partnerships.
3. No Staking Rewards. Participation in the protocol is not longer being awarded.
4. Less Decentralized Power. Governance cannot control minting in the future, so the amount of offerings for utility are limited. We've tied its hands.
5. Oligarchy Governance. The protocol no longer awards active participation. Instead, it awards the lucky, the lazy, the elders, and the rich.
6. $$$$ Upward Cost. Goods/fees tied to the price of VERT could become unaffordable.
7. Investors Leave. By stopping minting, it completely alienates those who just came here to farm.

---

Option #2

End farm in ~5 months. 500k cap.

Max Supply @ 500,000 tokens. We will focus main development on sustainable buyback and liquidity rewards.

PROS

1. $$$ HODL Potential. 2nd highest price potential per market cap.
2. Good Price Action. No more inflation causing sell pressure.
3. New Investors + Keep Old Investors. HODLers welcome. Farmers welcome. More room for everybody.

CONS

1. Complex. A buyback and redistribution mechanism is required.
2. Utility Required Fast. A solid utility that provides income quickly is required to reward liquidity.
3. High Stress on Development. We only have a few short months to get development up and running and bringing in high value income.
4. Oligarchy Governance. Though the protocol awards some active participation, it still favors the lucky, the lazy, the elders, and the rich if the price does exceptionally well.

---

Option #3

End farm in ~13 months. 1M cap.

Max Supply @ 1,000,000 tokens. See PROS/CONS of above/below options.

Option #4

Make current 3M cap hard.

Keep the Max Supply @ 3,000,000 tokens, but no more "soft".

PROS

1. Low Stress on Development. Gives us plenty of time to work out buyback & distribution models, prove out deflationary mechanisms, and roll out strategies to gain exposure to new markets.
2. Good Developer Budget. Developer wallet will continue to be paid out by the farm and any new utility fees.
3. Utility Governance. Governance becomes more the utility it was designed to be.
4. Keeps Old Investors. Farmers will continue making rewards for quite some time.

CONS

1. Complex. A buyback and burn+redistribution mechanism is required.
2. $$ HODL Potential. 2nd lowest price potential per market cap.
3. Utility Required. A solid utility that provides income to the protocol is required to reward liquidity.

---

Option #5

Sustainable farming. No cap.

No max supply, ever. Keep building out deflationary mechanisms to control the circulating supply.

PROS

1. Low Stress on Development. Developer can take their time coming up with some breakthrough buyback & burn mechanisms.
2. High Liquidity. Liquidity of all varieties can be rewarded.
3. Sustainable Budget. Budgetary income for marketing, developments, and partnerships is baked into the existing protocol.
4. Staking Rewards. Participation in the protocol is incentivized.
5. More Decentralized Power. Governance can control minting in the future, so the amount of offerings for utility are limitless.
6. Utility Governance. Governance becomes the utility it was designed to be, since the price reflects more of a profit sharing model than growth.
7. $ Upward Cost. Goods/fees tied to the price of VERT will likely stay in an affordable range.
8. Investors Stay. By continuing the farm, it keeps the existing investors happy.

CONS

1. Complex. A hefty buyback and burn mechanism is required. Try explaining that to a noob.
2. $ HODL Potential. Worst price potential per market cap.
3. Volatile Price Action. Inflation causes sell pressure to heighten when sentiment is low, but buyback and burn mechanisms provide a market cap floor and rebound until the next high.
4. Trust Required. There exists a strong element of central control regarding emissions, initially.
5. Utility Required. A solid utility that provides income to the protocol is required to reward liquidity and staking.
6. HODLers Sidelined. Until price movement indicates a successfully controlled circulating supply, the HODLers will unlikely make their appearance.

---

Learn More:

• READ COMMENTARY ON OUR MEDIUM
• WATCH PART 2 OF MAX SUPPLY VIDEO ON YOUTUBE

---

Vote wisely ;)