I keep coming back to one simple thought with Fogo. The tech can be excellent and still not answer the harder question, which is whether the token is built to hold value once real usage shows up. Speed makes a chain feel right. Token design decides whether the asset becomes something people actually keep, or something they only touch for a moment and then move on from.
Here is the trap high performance networks fall into. When everything is smooth, users naturally keep their balances small. They do what they need to do, pay the fee, and move on. If the ecosystem leans heavily into trading style activity, that pattern can get even sharper because traders do not like holding extra inventory. So the better the experience gets, the more the token can start behaving like a disposable input. That is token velocity rising, and it matters because rising velocity usually creates steady sell pressure even when the chain itself is thriving.
A lot of people treat tokenomics like a distribution chart, but I think it is closer to a market behavior blueprint. You are not just deciding who gets tokens. You are deciding what those people are incentivized to do with them. If the easiest profitable behavior is receive, trade the narrative, and exit, then the token will struggle to carry a premium no matter how strong the engineering is. If the easiest profitable behavior is hold because holding unlocks real advantages, then you start building something that can last.
Airdrops are a perfect example of both sides of the coin. They can broaden ownership fast, which is good. But they also put tokens into the hands of people who have no cost basis and no reason to be patient. Many will sell quickly, not out of spite, just because that is the rational thing to do if there is no sticky reason to hold. If the project wants that distribution method to become a strength instead of a constant overhang, it has to create reasons for the airdropped supply to settle into longer term positions, not just circulate.
The part that always makes me watch extra carefully is treasury behavior. When a large pool of tokens is liquid and controlled by a foundation, the market is not only pricing supply. It is pricing trust. If spending is disciplined, transparent, and tied to programs that produce retention, treasury can look like an endowment that grows the network. If spending is reactive, frequent, or feels like it is buying short term activity, treasury starts to look like an invisible seller. That perception alone can keep serious capital on the sidelines.
Cliffs and long dated vesting for insiders are usually framed as alignment, and it does help in the early window. But it also creates calendar risk. The months around major unlocks are where markets get weird, because traders position early, hedge early, and narratives harden early. You do not wait until the unlock date to feel the impact. If organic demand is not strong by then, unlock windows can become a gravitational pull on price and sentiment.
Inflation is another quiet driver. A low fixed inflation rate sounds responsible, but it means the system cannot rely on printing tokens to pay for security and participation forever. That forces the chain to prove it can stand on real economic legs. The challenge is that fee flows often end up in the hands of validators and operators who routinely sell to cover costs. If the token does not have mechanisms that encourage those recipients to hold, then increased usage can translate into increased recurring sell flow. That is the part many people miss. Adoption alone is not enough if adoption simply increases the volume of tokens being sold.
Bridging in outside assets can help Fogo grow faster, but it can also make the native token less central. If most trading collateral and pairs are bridged stablecoins and majors, users can do a lot on the chain without ever needing meaningful amounts of the native asset. Operational demand is real, but it is weak demand, because it can be minimized. That is why chains that import liquidity must be deliberate about giving the native token roles that cannot be easily substituted.
What I want to see from Fogo, and what would actually change my conviction, is evidence that the token is being woven into the system in ways that slow it down. Not slow the chain down, slow the token down. That means more tokens sitting in long horizon positions, in staking that has real utility beyond yield, in liquidity structures that reward staying rather than hopping, in risk backstops and insurance mechanisms that make holding feel like owning part of the system rather than renting a ticket to use it.
If the early ecosystem is mostly short term incentives, points style behavior, and mercenary liquidity, velocity will spike and the token will feel like inventory. If the early ecosystem leans into settlement and risk infrastructure that makes capital comfortable living there, velocity can compress and the token can start acting like capital. The difference is not marketing. It is policy, incentives, and governance discipline.
