彌賽亞的分析發現，令牌回購計劃未能防止價格下降。

彌賽亞（Messari）最近的一項分析表明，代幣回購計劃通常被吹捧為穩定機制，無法防止幾個主要令牌的價格下降。

Recent analysis by Messari has highlighted the failure of token buyback programs in preventing significant price declines for several major tokens. This finding comes as buyback programs have seen increasing adoption by crypto networks in an effort to stabilize token prices and provide support to investors.

Messari的最新分析強調了代幣回購計劃在防止幾個主要代幣的大幅下降方面失敗。這一發現是因為回購計劃的收養越來越多地採用加密網絡，以穩定代幣價格並為投資者提供支持。

Among the tokens examined by Messari, SNx experienced the sharpest decline, with its price plummeting by 77%. GNS followed closely, with a 76% price drop. In total, GMx saw a 34% decrease, and RAY witnessed a 26% fall in value.

在彌賽亞（Messari）檢查的代幣中，SNX的價格下降了最高的下降，其價格下降了77％。 GNS緊隨其後，價格下降了76％。總共GMX下降了34％，Ray的價值下降了26％。

“RAY, GMX, GNS and SNX have programmatically bought back millions in tokens which are now way below cost. E.g. SNx bought 685k SNx for $33m in 2023Q1 which is now worth $4.3m. They'll likely buy another 2-3m SNx this year at an even higher avg price,” said Sunny Shi, Enterprise Research Analyst at Messari.

“ Ray，GMX，GNS和SNX通過編程方式回購了數百萬美元的代幣，這些代幣現在低於成本。EGSNX在2023q1中以3300萬美元的價格購買了68.5萬美元的SNX，現在價值430萬美元。他們可能以更高的AVG價格購買了2至300萬SNX，更高的AVG價格，” Sunny Sunny Shi Shi Shi Shi，Entrerprise Research at Messari atsssyari。

Shi identified three major flaws in the token buyback strategy, which he described as part of the “programmatic token buyback fallacy.”

Shi在代幣回購策略中確定了三個主要缺陷，他將其描述為“程序化令牌回購謬誤”的一部分。

Firstly, Shi argued that buybacks have a minimal impact on price action, which is instead driven by broader market narrative and other factors such as revenue growth.

首先，Shi認為回購對價格行動的影響最小，而這是由更廣泛的市場敘事和其他因素（例如收入增長）驅動的。

Secondly, he explained that when a project's revenues are high, and its token price is elevated, engaging in large-scale token buybacks at inflated prices leads to an inefficient use of capital.

其次，他解釋說，當一個項目的收入很高，並且其代幣價格升高時，以膨脹的價格從事大規模的代幣回購會導致資本使用效率低下。

Finally, Shi pointed out that during periods of low prices and revenues, when a project urgently needs cash for innovation or restructuring, it often finds itself lacking the necessary funds. At the same time, the project is likely sitting on significant unrealized losses from its buyback investments.

最後，Shi指出，在低價和收入的期間，當一個項目急需現金進行創新或重組時，通常會發現自己缺乏必要的資金。同時，該項目可能會因回購投資而遭受重大未實現的損失。

“This is just poor capital allocation. The mindset should be growth at all costs or real value distribution to holders in the form of stables / majors (see veAERO or BananaGun). But not this hybrid approach which is best described as a failure to commit,” Shi added.

Shi補充說：“這只是資本分配的貧困。心態應以馬s /大滿貫的形式不惜一切代價增長或實際價值分配（請參閱Veaero或Bananagun）。但不是最好將這種混合方法描述為未能承諾的混合方法。”

Junior Partner at Pantera Capital Mason Nystrom agreed with Shi's analysis.

Pantera Capital Mason Nystrom的初級合夥人同意Shi的分析。

“Solid analysis on how programmatic buybacks can negatively impact a business as they push protocols into a dilemma of buying back tokens at inflated prices and limiting the capital protocols can use to drive fundamental growth vs just token price.”

“關於程序化回購如何將協議推向以誇張的價格回購代幣並限制資本協議可以用來推動基本增長與僅僅是代幣價格的難題時，他們如何將協議推向回購代幣的困境，從而對企業產生負面影響。”

Instead, Nystrom suggested that companies and protocols should use the revenue to invest in growth or conduct strategic buybacks with long-term goals in mind. This approach, he believes, will ultimately create more value for token holders.

相反，Nystrom建議公司和協議應利用收入來投資增長或進行具有長期目標的戰略回購。他認為，這種方法最終將為令牌持有人創造更多的價值。