Comment on the Proposal to Eliminate the Venomics System in PancakeSwap
As an active member of the PancakeSwap community, I strongly oppose the proposal to eliminate the venomics system and replace it with a centralized burn-based model. This change not only undermines decentralization but also jeopardizes the intrinsic value of CAKE and the long-term sustainability of the ecosystem. Below are the key points that support this position:
-
The current locking system (venomics) is effective and decentralized: Unlike the proposed model—which allows centralized actors to lock CAKE temporarily and vote without real commitment—the current venomics system ensures that governance power comes from long-term stakers. This aligns incentives between users and the protocol. The new model removes penalties and opens the door to governance manipulation with zero long-term exposure.
-
Eliminating CAKE’s intrinsic value: Under venomics, CAKE has utility and value through governance rights. Removing this system turns CAKE into a purely speculative asset, its price driven only by expectations of future burns. This strips away its fundamental purpose and turns it into something no different from a memecoin.
-
Burning is overvalued and inefficient at higher prices: While CAKE at $1.70 can be considered deflationary under the proposed model, our analysis shows that once CAKE surpasses ~$5, the burn mechanism is no longer sufficient to offset supply pressures. This drastically reduces the potential for a sustainable flywheel. In contrast, venomics enables a deflationary cycle fueled by DEX volume and incentivized long-term locking.
-
Loss of ecosystem diversity: Removing low-cap token pools will reduce the diversity and innovation within PancakeSwap. It discourages new projects from building here and shrinks trading volume. With no viable incentive to enter, future top-tier projects will choose other ecosystems. Venomics fosters growth and broad participation, fueling organic volume and ecosystem expansion.
-
Frequent tokenomics changes destroy trust: Changing CAKE’s economic model every year introduces instability and deters serious investors. No one wants to hold a token that can be fundamentally changed overnight.
-
Immediate price collapse from increased supply: This proposal would instantly release up to 79 million CAKE into circulation, which would trigger a sharp drop in price. Burns alone cannot keep up with this influx—not in the short term nor over several years.
-
Real-world success of venomics: Protocols like Curve have proven that venomics-based models are up to 3x more effective than burn-only systems. Curve has operated for over four years with this model, achieving sustained growth, user retention, and volume generation.
-
Destruction of ecosystem projects: Projects such as Cakepie, Listadao, Astherus, and StakeDAO rely on synthetic derivatives of CAKE. This change would wipe them out overnight without warning, discouraging future innovation and community development.
Conclusion: This proposal is not beneficial in the short or long term. It undermines decentralization, strips CAKE of its utility, and prevents the ecosystem from achieving sustainable growth. Instead of destroying venomics, we should be enhancing it—building a flywheel driven by real volume, long-term commitment, and community governance.