Grayscale: "If the Proposals Are Adopted, the Prices of These Two Altcoins Could Rise"

cryptonews.ruPubblicato 2026-08-14Pubblicato ultima volta 2026-08-14

Introduzione

Grayscale's Head of Research, Zach Pandl, stated that proposed changes to the tokenomics of Ethereum ($ETH) and Solana ($SOL) could significantly slow their supply growth rates, potentially boosting prices. The discussed code modifications aim to reduce the annual inflation of ETH and SOL tokens. Slower supply growth could decrease the number of new tokens entering the market, increasing scarcity. Grayscale estimates that if implemented, Ethereum's annual supply inflation could fall to about 0.4% by late 2031—close to Bitcoin's rate—while Solana's could drop to roughly 1.1%. For context, this compares to gold's ~1.8% annual supply growth and the US CPI inflation of ~3.3%. While the proposals are still under community discussion and not finalized, Pandl noted that Solana's changes appear to have broader support and a higher likelihood of adoption. However, lower token inflation might also reduce staking rewards, as a significant portion comes from new token issuance. Pandl concluded that the reduced supply could increase scarcity and upward price pressure, particularly benefiting investors holding non-staked tokens.

Zach Pandl, Head of Research at Grayscale, stated that if the proposed tokenomics changes being discussed within the Ethereum ($ETH) and Solana ($SOL) communities are implemented, the supply growth rates of both crypto assets could slow significantly, which could potentially have a favorable impact on prices.

According to Pandl, the code changes under consideration for the Ethereum and Solana ecosystems are aimed at reducing the annual token inflation rates of $ETH and $SOL. All else being equal, slowing supply growth could reduce the number of new tokens entering the market, leading to increased scarcity of existing assets.

According to Grayscale's estimates, if these rules are enacted, the annual supply inflation of Ethereum could fall to approximately 0.4% by the end of 2031. This figure is close to Bitcoin's supply growth rate. Solana's annual supply inflation is projected to decline to around 1.1%.

For comparison, Grayscale noted that the annual supply increase of gold is approximately 1.8 percent, while U.S. Consumer Price Index inflation is approximately 3.3 percent.

The proposed changes for Ethereum and Solana are still under discussion within their communities and have not yet been finalized. Pandl stated that the proposals for Solana appear to have received broader approval and therefore have a relatively higher probability of being implemented.

However, reducing token inflation could also lead to a decrease in rewards for investors engaged in staking. This is because a significant portion of staking revenue for $ETH and $SOL comes from the issuance of new tokens.

Pandl noted that the slowdown in supply growth could lead to increased scarcity, exerting upward pressure on the prices of $ETH and $SOL, and that investors holding non-staked tokens, in particular, could benefit.

*This is not investment advice.

end-content

Domande pertinenti

QAccording to Grayscale's research head, what could be the potential impact on the prices of Ethereum ($ETH) and Solana ($SOL) if certain tokenomic changes are implemented?

AIf the discussed tokenomic changes in the Ethereum and Solana ecosystems are implemented, the supply growth rates of both crypto assets could slow significantly. This would potentially lead to a supply shortage of the existing tokens, exerting upward pressure on the prices of $ETH and $SOL.

QWhat specific annual supply inflation rates does Grayscale estimate for Ethereum and Solana by the end of 2031 if the proposed rules are enacted?

AGrayscale estimates that if the rules are enacted, Ethereum's annual supply inflation could decrease to approximately 0.4% by the end of 2031. For Solana, the annual supply inflation is projected to fall to around 1.1%.

QWhat comparison did Grayscale make regarding the projected supply inflation of Ethereum and Solana versus traditional assets?

AGrayscale compared the projected supply inflation rates to traditional assets. They noted that Ethereum's projected 0.4% rate is close to Bitcoin's supply growth rate. For context, the annual supply increase of gold is approximately 1.8%, and the U.S. Consumer Price Index (CPI) inflation is around 3.3%.

QWhat potential downside does the article mention regarding the reduction of token inflation for $ETH and $SOL?

AThe article mentions that reducing token inflation could lead to lower rewards for investors who participate in staking. This is because a significant portion of the staking yield for $ETH and $SOL comes from the issuance of new tokens.

QWhich of the two proposed changes (Ethereum's or Solana's) is stated to have a relatively higher chance of being implemented, and why?

AThe proposed changes for Solana are stated to have a relatively higher chance of being implemented. According to Zach Pandl, the proposals for Solana appear to have received broader acceptance within its community.

Letture associate

Pearl: Can You Simultaneously Conduct AI Inference and Mine Cryptocurrency? | Project Introduction

Pearl: Can AI Inference and Mining Really Be Done Simultaneously? A Project Introduction Pearl is a new proof-of-work (PoW) blockchain that aims to merge cryptocurrency mining with useful AI computation. Its core idea is to replace the traditional, arbitrary cryptographic hashing in PoW (like Bitcoin's) with matrix multiplications—the fundamental operation in neural network inference. In theory, a GPU performing these multiplications for an AI task (like generating text) could simultaneously be participating in block validation and earning the native PRL token. This proposes a "2-for-1" scenario where one unit of energy produces both AI output and cryptocurrency. The concept tackles the perceived "waste" in traditional PoW by making the computation useful. However, the critical challenge lies in ensuring this useful work is performed in a trustless, permissionless manner like Bitcoin. Pearl's protocol uses cryptographic techniques (adding verifiable "noise" to matrices and requiring proofs for small slices of the calculation) to prevent miners from cheating by using easily computable random numbers instead of genuine AI model weights and data. Despite the technical design, current network data suggests a significant gap between theory and practice. Analysis indicates the vast majority of the network's substantial computing power (tens of Exahashes) is still spent on multiplying randomly generated matrices, not on processing real AI inference requests. The "useful" output of the network is currently near zero. This happens because the protocol verifies the computational work (the multiplication) but cannot inherently verify the semantic usefulness or origin of the input data. Miners economically optimize for the block reward, not for producing usable AI results. Pearl's development includes releasing certified variants of open-source AI models (like Llama, Qwen) optimized for its system and partnerships (e.g., with Together AI) to offer discounted inference services subsidized by the future value of PRL tokens. The project bets that a future surge in scalable, low-latency AI inference demand will make it more profitable for miners to run real models than random data, aligning the network's security with productive output. Until then, it operates primarily as a GPU mining chain with a different, AI-compatible algorithm.

marsbit2 min fa

Pearl: Can You Simultaneously Conduct AI Inference and Mine Cryptocurrency? | Project Introduction

marsbit2 min fa

September US Bond Sell-off: Not Inflation Expectations, But Soaring Real Interest Rates

In September, the U.S. Treasury market experienced a significant sell-off. The yield on the 10-year Treasury surged from 4.75% to 5.29%, a 54 basis point increase. However, analysis reveals that over 90% of this rise, about 49 bps, came from a jump in real yields (as measured by TIPS), while market-implied inflation compensation rose only slightly by about 5 bps. This indicates the sell-off was driven primarily by a spike in real interest rates, not renewed inflation fears. This raises a key question: why is the market demanding higher real returns? Explanations could include stronger growth expectations, monetary policy adjustments, or higher risk premiums for holding long-term bonds. Notably, this bond market stress coincided with strong performance in AI-related tech stocks, particularly semiconductors, while other rate-sensitive sectors declined. This divergence suggests investors are pricing in vastly different futures for different assets. QuantStreet Capital's Harry Mamaysky proposes one explanation: the market may be repricing for both stronger future economic growth and the massive capital demands from Big Tech's AI infrastructure expansion. In this view, higher real rates and strong AI stocks aren't contradictory if investors believe future AI-driven profit growth can offset higher financing and discount rates. Yet, this remains a theory. Rising real yields could also reflect an increase in the term premium—the extra compensation investors require for holding long-term bonds—due to fiscal concerns or market volatility, rather than pure growth optimism. This distinction is crucial: if driven by growth, higher rates can coexist with rising equity valuations; if driven by a higher term premium, it could pressure corporate profits and asset prices more broadly. The critical unresolved issue is whether the market's demand for higher real returns stems from confidence in future economic profits (especially from AI diffusion) or from a reassessment of the risks of holding long-term assets. The answer will define the path for bonds, stocks, and the ongoing AI investment cycle.

marsbit12 min fa

September US Bond Sell-off: Not Inflation Expectations, But Soaring Real Interest Rates

marsbit12 min fa

Goldman Sachs Research Report Interpretation: Dell Delivers 4 to 6 Weeks Faster Than Peers, Memory Is the 2027 Bottleneck

Goldman Sachs Research Report Summary: Dell's Competitive Edge and Future Outlook (Based on October 8, 2026 Report) Dell maintains a competitive advantage in AI server delivery, with a lead time approximately 4-6 weeks faster than its competitors. This speed-to-market allows customers to generate revenue from their infrastructure sooner, supporting Dell's premium pricing relative to other OEMs and ODMs. Goldman Sachs reiterates a Buy rating with a $570 price target. Key points from the report, based on a management meeting at Dell's headquarters, include: * **Extended Competitive Moat:** Dell's leadership extends beyond component procurement to differentiated capabilities in system design, supply chain, manufacturing, and deployment. The company's scale and pre-integration testing enable faster deployment of large clusters. * **2027 Memory Bottleneck:** Supply remains a primary constraint for AI infrastructure growth. Dell expects memory supply tightness to persist into 2027, with demand growth outpacing supply improvements. Its scale and direct sales model provide early visibility into demand shifts, aiding in prioritizing allocations for AI/server opportunities over weaker segments like PCs. * **Profitability Drivers:** Future margin expansion is expected to be driven primarily by storage solutions (leveraging Dell's own IP like PowerScale) and operational leverage. AI server margins are maintained in the mid-single-digit range, seen as a balance between profitability and competitive positioning. Component cost fluctuations, especially for memory, are passed through to customers. * **Enterprise AI Adoption:** Enterprise AI adoption is still in early stages. Dell believes successful deployment requires data preparation and business process redesign, not just compute infrastructure. A hybrid architecture model is anticipated, combining cloud-based cutting-edge models with on-premise open-source models for cost control and security. The report concludes that the sustainability of Dell's premium pricing hinges on maintaining its delivery speed, order quality, and storage attach rates, with 2027 memory supply being a critical near-term factor to watch. *Disclaimer: This summary is based on a third-party Goldman Sachs research report dated October 8, 2026, and is for informational purposes only.*

marsbit33 min fa

Goldman Sachs Research Report Interpretation: Dell Delivers 4 to 6 Weeks Faster Than Peers, Memory Is the 2027 Bottleneck

marsbit33 min fa

U.S. Treasury Yields Soar, Why Can AI Stocks Continue to Rise?

In September, U.S. financial markets experienced a notable divergence: while long-term Treasury yields surged dramatically—the 10-year yield rising over 50 basis points—and fixed-income assets declined, AI-related and semiconductor stocks continued to rally, with the Nasdaq holding relatively firm. In contrast, small and mid-cap stocks, the equal-weight S&P 500, and rate-sensitive sectors lagged. This dynamic raises a key question: if higher interest rates typically pressure equity valuations by raising discount rates, why have tech stocks remained strong? The article, referencing analysis from QuantStreet Capital, suggests one interpretation: markets may be pricing in sufficiently high future earnings growth from AI, potentially enough to offset the valuation drag from elevated rates. However, a deeper puzzle emerges. The market optimism appears concentrated in AI infrastructure suppliers like semiconductor firms, which directly benefit from soaring capital expenditure (Capex) on data centers and chips. There is little evidence yet of this enthusiasm spreading to the broader corporate sector (the "Rest of the Corporate Sector"), whose future profits are supposed to ultimately justify these massive AI investments. This highlights the critical uncertainty in the AI investment thesis: who ultimately captures the economic value? While chipmakers see near-term revenue, the long-term sustainability depends on whether AI adoption boosts productivity and profitability for the wider economy, enabling end-user companies to bear the high costs. Preliminary productivity data shows some improvement, but direct evidence of AI-driven profit gains outside the tech sector remains sparse. Moving forward, key signals to watch include: the sustainability of AI infrastructure spending, evidence of AI translating into improved profitability for non-tech companies, and whether the rise in long-term yields reflects strong growth expectations or other risks like fiscal concerns. The current market behavior suggests confidence in the AI builders, but the broader payoff from AI—essential for justifying current valuations—is still pending confirmation.

marsbit37 min fa

U.S. Treasury Yields Soar, Why Can AI Stocks Continue to Rise?

marsbit37 min fa

Trading

Spot
活动图片