Core Problems of ATOM

Conversation
1

Core Problems of ATOM

1. No real demand

It is not used for gas, collateral, or settlement.

Users have no compelling reason to hold ATOM.

​

2. No value capture

No matter how big the ecosystem or how many chains there are,

revenues, fees, and profits are largely unrelated to ATOM.

​

3. Survives entirely on inflation

Its current price, staking, and node security

are all propped up by 10% annual maximum inflation.

The whole system would collapse without inflation.

​

4. The team only does superficial work

Tweaking IBC, SDK, interchain security, governance —

all are just minor infrastructure fixes.

They do not solve value capture or real demand.

2 Likes
2

@sdgggs, you’ve accurately diagnosed the “Legacy” problem of the Hub. The system is currently propped up by inflation because it lacks high-density utility to justify its security costs.

I am advocating an approach that doesn’t require the Hub to change its code or governance structure. It simply requires an architectural shift in how we utilize its security. By using a Landlord/Tenant logic (Multi-Tenant Collateral Anchoring), we can solve the four points you listed:

  1. Real Demand: Demand for ATOM (and the Hub’s security) should be driven by the high-velocity notarization of external value. When an industrial-scale application uses the Hub to anchor its state, it creates a constant, massive requirement for Hub block space that is based on real-world productivity, not just speculation.

  2. Value Capture: Revenue is captured directly through transaction fees. When a sovereign chain anchors its value to the Hub, every mint, sale, and purchase of that anchor asset (in my case FOMOG) generates fee revenue for Hub validators. The anchor asset is used to bond the specialized servers or validators on the sovereign chain, creating a direct economic link back to the Hub’s ledger.

  3. Ending the Inflation Trap: We can only lower inflation if we replace it with real transaction fee revenue. By bringing high-density utility to the Hub, we provide the “fee floor” necessary to sustain the network. At a scale of 10 million monthly transactions, this revenue becomes a primary driver of validator income, allowing the Hub to eventually thrive without inflation.

  4. Beyond Infrastructure: You’re right that minor infrastructure tweaks aren’t enough. We need Applications that use the Hub as a Global Settlement Vault. My project uses a sovereign chain for the “Work” (netting and execution) and the Hub for the “Record” (settlement). It treats the Hub as the premium billing system it was always meant to be.

I realize no one has successfully implemented this “braided” approach yet, but I am focused on proving that the architecture is sound. If it works, I can prove that the Hub is not only a bridge, but it’s the interchain’s central vault.

2 Likes