Tokenomics

The single most important question for BitView is what token does a viewer actually receive when they watch a stream? Get this wrong and every other piece of the business falls apart. This page lays out the four candidate designs, what each one buys you, and what we recommend.

The four candidate designs

Option A — pure stablecoin (USDC) reward

The streamer funds the distribution pool in USDC. Viewers earn USDC. They claim USDC. End of story.

Pros	Cons
Maximum clarity for the viewer ("I earned $1.20 today").	Streamer needs real fiat-denominated capital up front. Big barrier for small streamers.
Zero token-launch friction.	No fan-token / cult-identity / community formation upside.
Lowest regulatory surface.	No swap volume = no AMM revenue for the platform.
Useful even for streamers without crypto-literate fans.	BitView's only revenue line is platform fees on creation/claim.

Option B — pure SOL reward

Same as A but denominated in SOL. Slightly worse than USDC because SOL is volatile from the streamer's accounting perspective and the viewer's take-home perspective. The only reason to use SOL is when the streamer believes SOL goes up and wants their viewers long that bet.

Option C — streamer-issued SPL token

The streamer creates "PEWPIE" coin, mints 100M, funds the pool with PEWPIE. Viewers earn PEWPIE.

Pros	Cons
Strong identity — fans are PEWPIE holders, not just viewers.	PEWPIE has no liquidity unless someone seeds a pool.
Token-gated perks (PEWPIE-only Discord, raffles, IRL meetups).	Without a swap path, viewers' earnings are illusory.
Streamer can reserve a treasury allocation for themselves.	This is exactly what killed Rally and Roll: thousands of dead micro-tokens with zero liquidity.
Speculative upside if streamer grows.	Speculative downside if streamer flames out.

Option D — BTV native token (BitView's own SPL)

Everything is denominated in BTV. The streamer either funds the pool in BTV (having bought BTV from BitView's pool) or signs up for a "platform-sponsored" distribution where BitView treasury funds a portion in exchange for exclusivity / ad placement / data.

Pros	Cons
Closed-loop network effect: every distribution drives BTV demand.	Requires BitView to bootstrap initial liquidity and credibility.
Single liquid market — no fragmented per-streamer dust tokens.	Loses some streamer-identity upside.
Platform aligns with token value.	Regulatory care needed: BTV must be utility, not investment-vehicle-coded.

The recommended design — hybrid

Recommended: Tier-based, streamer chooses, BTV-routed.

We don't pick one. We let the streamer choose a reward tier at distribution-creation time, and every tier is internally settled through BTV to keep one liquid market:

Tier	Pool denom	Viewer claims	Best for
Stable	USDC funded by streamer	USDC	Cash-equivalent rewards. Brands, sponsorships.
Native	BTV funded by streamer (purchased through BitView at swap-in)	BTV (with optional auto-swap to USDC at claim)	Default. Smallest streamers without their own token.
Identity	Streamer-token funded by streamer	Streamer-token (with one-click swap path to BTV/USDC via Meteora pool)	Top streamers with a fan community willing to hold.
Sponsored	USDC funded by brand sponsor through BitView marketplace	USDC or BTV	High-engagement streams partnered with brands.

Every tier above ladders into BTV liquidity:

Stable: streamer buys USDC-denominated rewards, no BTV touch (we still earn the platform creation fee).
Native: streamer buys BTV → drives BTV/USDC pool volume → swap fee.
Identity: streamer creates token → BitView seeds a streamer-token/BTV Meteora DLMM pool → every viewer who cashes out to USDC routes STREAM → BTV → USDC, paying two swap fees, both partially captured by BitView. This is where the swap revenue line lives.
Sponsored: brand pays BitView in USDC up front, BitView pays out tier of choice. Marketplace take rate.

Do we need stablecoin involvement at all?

This is the central capital-policy question for BitView. If BTV is genuinely useful — as anti-sybil stake, fee-discount lever, sponsorship currency, and unit of account — viewers and streamers spend most of their time inside the BTV economy and rarely cash out. In that world, why would BitView ever tie up treasury capital in USDC/USDT pools?

The honest answer: yes, but minimally. Not because the closed BTV/STREAM loop fails — it doesn't — but because three specific surfaces genuinely need a stablecoin path:

Streamer fund-in. A streamer wanting to fund a Native-tier pool has USDC or fiat on hand. Without a USDC → BTV path, onboarding stalls at "go to a different DEX, get BTV, then come back." That's a churn moment.
Brand sponsorships (Phase 4). Brand budgets are USDC-denominated. Period. The marketplace settles in USDC into BitView escrow.
Viewer cashout. Even if 80% of viewers hold BTV indefinitely, the 20% who do cash out drive a meaningful chunk of swap revenue. Bad cashout UX kills word-of-mouth and stalls adoption.

The remaining surfaces — Identity-tier swaps, accruals, governance voting, fee discounts, anti-sybil stake — are all pure BTV / STREAM. No stablecoin ever touches them.

The architectural ring model

        STREAM/BTV         ←── inner ring
        Meteora DLMM           STREAM only ever pairs with BTV.
        (BitView-seeded)       No STREAM/USDC, no STREAM/SOL pools
              ▲                anywhere on platform.
              │
              ▼
              BTV          ←── settlement layer
              ▲                inside-platform unit of account
              │
              ▼
        BTV/SOL pool       ←── outer ring (BitView-seeded; SOL is native)
              ▼
        BTV/USDC pool      ←── outer ring (minimally seeded + LP incentivized)
              ▼                only fiat-equivalent rail BitView maintains
        SOL/USDC, USDC/USDT  ←── third-party (Jupiter routes through these)

Two key consequences:

STREAM tokens always pair only with BTV. Never with USDC, never with SOL. Forcing the BTV leg keeps streamer-token liquidity concentrated in one pool per streamer instead of fragmenting across pairs. A viewer who wants USDC for their PEWPIE earnings goes PEWPIE → BTV → USDC, two hops, both via BitView-curated pools or Jupiter routing on the second.
USDT is not a first-class citizen. USDT users hit Jupiter aggregator which routes USDT → USDC → BTV via third-party USDT/USDC pools that already exist. We don't seed USDT pools, don't carry USDT inventory, and don't market the USDT path. USDC has clearer regulatory standing under MiCA, and USDT depeg history makes it inappropriate as a treasury asset.

What BitView seeds (treasury direct)

Pool	Side seeded by treasury	Source
BTV/SOL Meteora DLMM	$500K BTV + $500K SOL equivalent	15% liquidity-bootstrap allocation
BTV/USDC Meteora DLMM	$300K BTV + $300K USDC	15% allocation + ~$300K USDC from raise
STREAM/BTV pools (per Identity-tier launch)	50K BTV per launch	Same allocation, rotating

That is the entire BitView-owned LP footprint. Total treasury USDC exposure at genesis: ~$300K. That's the only stablecoin we own, and we own it as a passive LP position, not as operating cash for trading.

What we don't seed

No BTV/USDT pool (USDT routes through Jupiter via USDC).
No STREAM/USDC pools (forces the BTV leg, prevents fragmentation).
No SOL/USDC pool (Solana already has $100M+ depth across Raydium / Meteora / Orca; we don't compete with it).

How third parties grow the BTV/USDC pool

$300K USDC LP is enough for typical viewer-cashout tickets without major slippage at MVP scale, but it's thin if the platform takes off. We solve this with an LP incentive program funded from a dedicated allocation:

Field	Value
Total bucket	30,000,000 BTV (3% of total supply)
Pool rewarded	BTV/USDC on Meteora DLMM only
Emission rate	1,250,000 BTV/month, linear over 24 months
Eligibility	Any address holding qualifying LP tokens during weekly snapshots
Claim	Continuous (vesting-style); claimable any time after earned
Sunset	Hard cutoff at month 24. No renewal.

This is the standard Solana DEX bootstrap pattern (variants used by Raydium, Orca, Meteora). Independent LPs come for the yield, deepen the pool, and graduate to organic LPing once volumes support fee-only economics.

The 3% allocation is fixed, on-chain, and capped. There is no governance override during the program. After month 24, pool depth depends purely on organic LP fees — that's a deliberate filter on whether BitView is generating enough swap volume to sustain its own liquidity. If month-24 organic depth is healthy, we're real. If it isn't, we have a product problem that more incentives wouldn't fix.

Why this beats the alternatives

vs "BitView owns deep stablecoin pools" ($5M+ treasury USDC LP):

Capital-efficient. We don't tie up $5M of USDC indefinitely.
Lower IL risk to treasury — BTV/USDC pool is one third-party LPs share, not one we eat alone.
Clean positioning: we are a platform, not a market maker.

vs "no stablecoin involvement at all":

Streamer onboarding doesn't break at "where do I get BTV first."
Brand sponsorship marketplace (Phase 4) actually works.
Viewer cashout UX stays usable through scale.

vs "USDT primary or USDC + USDT both":

USDC has clearer MiCA standing.
USDT depegs are a real treasury risk we don't need.
USDT users still get served — Jupiter routes USDT → USDC → BTV through pools we don't own and don't have to monitor.

So, to answer the original question

The instinct to keep this a closed BTV / STREAM economy is correct for the inner ring (everything that happens during accrual, claim, and Identity-tier secondary trading). It's wrong for the outer ring, where USDC is the unavoidable bridge to fiat, brands, and streamer working capital. Our job is to make the outer ring as small, boring, and capital-light as possible — and let the secondary market do the heavy lifting.

BTV native token

Supply and allocation (proposal)

All numbers below are proposed defaults subject to community review before the BTV public launch. They are designed to be defensible, not aggressive.

Total supply: 1,000,000,000 BTV (1B), fixed. No inflation after the initial emission schedule completes.

Allocation:

Bucket	%	Vesting
Viewer rewards (5-year emission)	30%	Linear over 60 months from launch
Streamer onboarding bonuses	15%	Distributed against verified-streamer milestones
Liquidity bootstrap (BTV/USDC, BTV/SOL pools)	15%	Locked in pools, owned by treasury
Treasury (ops, audits, partnerships)	15%	4-year linear, 1-year cliff
Team	12%	4-year linear, 1-year cliff
Investors / strategic	8%	3-year linear, 6-month cliff
Public launch / community sale	5%	Unlocked at launch

Utility (deep dive)

BTV is not a security. It is a coordination + utility token. The four utility lines below are deliberately sized to make BTV genuinely useful without making BTV a vehicle for "hold and pray for price".

1. Anti-sybil stake

A wallet must hold ≥ 100 BTV (locked or unlocked, in the linked wallet) for accruals to credit. New viewers receive a one-time 100 BTV onboarding airdrop on first verified Twitch link, sourced from the 30% viewer-rewards allocation — so the gate is free at first entry but real after that.

Mechanics:

Need not be locked. A held-but-unlocked balance qualifies. The user can transfer or trade the BTV; they just lose accrual eligibility until they re-acquire 100. This preserves UX flexibility.
Slashable for confirmed industrial-sybil behavior. Slashed BTV goes to the protocol treasury. False-positive risk is managed via a manual review queue + appeals path; see Anti-fraud.
Stake-weighted bonus (small). A wallet holding ≥ 1,000 BTV earns a 1.10× rate multiplier on accruals. Not exploitable as a yield loop because it requires capital lock equivalent to the bonus value many times over.

2. Fee discount

Holding BTV (no lock-up required) reduces BitView protocol fees on a per-transaction basis:

BTV held in caller's wallet	Swap protocol fee	Distribution creation fee
< 10K	0.10%	$5 / event
≥ 10K	0.07%	$0 / event
≥ 100K	0.04%	$0 / event
≥ 1M	0.02%	$0 / event

Verified at swap time via on-chain balance check. There is no staking contract, no lock-up, no separate "veBTV" wrapper. This makes BTV holding a soft yield: the more swaps a holder does, the more the discount saves them in fee-equivalent terms, without inflationary emissions.

3. Governance lock-up (Phase 5+)

In Phase 5 (Governance), BTV staked into the governance contract earns vote weight proportional to lock duration — a ve-token-style design popularized by Curve / Velodrome and proven in production for years:

Lock duration	Vote weight per BTV
Liquid (no lock)	0×
1 month	0.25×
6 months	0.50×
1 year	1.00×
4 years (max)	4.00×

Locked BTV cannot be transferred or sold during the lock. Vote weight decays linearly as the lock approaches expiry. This biases governance toward holders with long-term commitment and prevents flash-loan governance attacks.

4. Sponsorship marketplace currency (Phase 4+)

Brand sponsors can pay marketplace deposits in two ways:

USDC (default): brand pays 100% of campaign budget in USDC. BitView take rate 5%.
BTV: brand acquires BTV from the open market and pays in BTV. BitView take rate 4% (1% discount). The brand carries BTV price exposure between acquisition and campaign settlement.

This creates a steady BTV demand sink at the marketplace: every USDC discount paid out is BTV bought from the open market. At $300K/yr sponsorship volume in BTV-settled campaigns, that's a structural demand floor without BitView needing to do anything actively.

What BTV explicitly does NOT do

The constitutional restrictions, in priority order. These are deliberately public to make BTV defensibly utility-coded under the Howey framework.

No revenue share. BTV does not entitle holders to a share of BitView platform revenue. This is the most important securities-distance choice.
No discretionary minting. The 1B supply is fixed at genesis. The 5-year viewer-reward emission curve is published and on-chain enforced. After month 60, no further BTV is minted in any category.
No auto-stake / auto-compound product. Holding qualifies for fee discounts; we do not run a "stake BTV, get more BTV" yield loop.
No automatic burn from fees. Fee revenue stays in treasury as USDC / SOL / BTV LP positions. Burning is buyback-equivalent; we keep the option open as a governance vote in Phase 5+ but don't commit to it now.
No BitView-sponsored leverage. We don't list BTV on a lending protocol, run a leverage product, or partner with a market maker to lend treasury BTV against their inventory.
No promise of price appreciation. The market price of BTV is determined by secondary trading. We say so explicitly in the white paper §6.

Streamer-token mechanics (Identity tier)

When a streamer chooses the Identity tier we run, on their behalf:

SPL mint creation with metadata (name, symbol, image, decimals=6).
Initial liquidity seed — BitView treasury seeds a Meteora DLMM STREAM/BTV pool with 50K BTV worth of BTV + 50K BTV worth of STREAM at a chosen launch price. The streamer can match-fund (recommended) or take the pool fully on the BitView side at the cost of a higher per-swap royalty kickback to the platform.
Streamer reserve — 10% of the streamer-token supply goes to a 2-year-vested streamer treasury wallet they control. This gives the streamer skin in the game and a future reward without dumping at launch.
BitView protocol allocation — 5% of the streamer-token supply goes to a BitView-controlled wallet, 4-year vest, used for liquidity maintenance and marketing campaigns. This is the streamer's "we believe in you" line item.
Distribution allocation — the remaining 85% is the rewards pool, from which the streamer funds individual distribution events.

Creator royalty

Streamer-tokens carry a 0.10% creator royalty on every swap that touches the STREAM/BTV pool. The royalty stream goes to the streamer's wallet. This is the most important streamer-side revenue line: it's recurring, trustless, and grows with secondary-market activity in the streamer's token.

A successful streamer with $10M annual swap volume on their token earns $10K/year passive from the creator royalty alone — separate from any pool they fund or any subscription revenue.

Non-fungible loyalty layer (NFT drops)

The fungible streamer-token (STREAM) and BTV are the platform's "balance" layer. On top of that sits a non-fungible loyalty layer: streamers can mint and distribute NFT drops to their most valuable viewers around special events, with their own royalty stream.

NFT drops sit cleanly outside the swap-router architecture — streamer-NFTs are not pool-paired, they trade on Magic Eden / Tensor like any Solana NFT, and BitView takes a 10% slice of the streamer's royalty (default 5% royalty → 4.5% streamer / 0.5% BitView). They are not a fungible reward path; they're identity, not balance.

The full feature spec — eligibility predicates, push vs pull mechanics, holder utility, anti-fraud, revenue model, phasing — is in NFT drops. Worth reading in full because it touches the streamer side of the three-way-win meaningfully and is one of the clearest Free → Pro upgrade triggers in the catalog.

Liquidity policy

What treasury holds, why, and how aggressively we manage it. This is the line between "we are a market maker" (which we are not) and "we keep just enough liquidity to make the platform work" (which we are).

Position sizing

Position	Initial	Long-term policy
BTV/SOL Meteora DLMM	$500K BTV + $500K SOL	Maintain — no aggressive rebalance, ride volatility
BTV/USDC Meteora DLMM	$300K BTV + $300K USDC	Maintain initial; do not grow with treasury cash
STREAM/BTV pools (per Identity-tier launch)	50K BTV per launch	Time-decay: pull liquidity after 18 months if streamer is dormant; otherwise leave
Idle USDC (operating cash)	~6 months runway	Hold; not deployed to LP
Idle SOL (operating cash)	~3 months runway	Hold; not deployed to LP

Rebalancing rules

No active concentration management. We use Meteora DLMM with wide initial bin distribution and let the curve handle price moves. We do not run a 24/7 rebalancing bot. (We had it in an earlier draft; in production this would mean operationalizing MEV-protection and complex inventory accounting that we don't want to own.)
Quarterly review of pool concentration drift. If composition has rotated > 40% from initial mix (e.g., the BTV/USDC pool is now 65% BTV after a price drop), we make a one-time public decision: rebalance to neutral, or accept the drift. The decision is documented in the quarterly transparency report.
Streamer-token pool decay. If a STREAM token's price drops 80%+ from launch and 90+ days pass without a new distribution event, we pull pool liquidity at the next quarterly review and return BTV to treasury. The dead-token pool is archived. The token mint itself continues to exist on-chain forever — that's not for us to remove.

What we will not do with treasury

No leveraged LP. We hold spot LP positions only.
No yield farming on third-party protocols. Treasury USDC / SOL operating reserves are not deployed to Kamino, MarginFi, Drift, or any other yield product. Treasury is for runway, not return.
No liquidity-as-a-service partnerships that involve BitView lending BTV to a third-party market maker against their inventory. Smells like undisclosed dilution.
No protocol-owned liquidity buyouts (Olympus-style). We don't bond BTV for LP tokens. Initial seed is the seed; everything else is the market.

Money flow accounting

Tracing each currency through the system makes the policy concrete. Below: the four primary value events, what flows where, and which entity owns what at each step.

Event 1 — Streamer funds a Native-tier distribution

streamer wallet:    $1,000 USDC
                       │
                       ▼ Jupiter route (Meteora BTV/USDC pool)
                       │   ~0.30% total fee (0.10% BitView + 0.10% LP + 0.10% Jupiter slip)
                       ▼
                  ~200,000 BTV (at $0.005 launch price)
                       │
                       ▼ on-chain transfer
                       │
              distributor vault (PDA)

BitView captures: 0.10% protocol fee on the swap = ~$1.

Event 2 — Viewer accrues during stream

backend (off-chain):
  for each linked viewer present in chat:
    accrual_doc.amount += per_tick_share
  no tokens move on-chain

BitView captures: nothing. Pure off-chain accounting.

Event 3 — Distribution finalizes, viewer claims

backend → on-chain:  merkle root published from accrual ledger
                     (signed by streamer or operator multi-sig)

viewer wallet:       new_claim instruction
                       │
                       ▼ vault transfers BTV
                       │
                  viewer's ATA (associated token account)
                  viewer pays Solana network fee (~$0.0005)
                  no BitView fee on claim itself

BitView captures: nothing on the claim event. Claim fees are explicitly 0% to keep the path frictionless and reduce on-chain failure modes.

Event 4 — Viewer cashes out

viewer wallet:    50,000 BTV
                       │
                       ▼ swap router
                       │
                       │  step a: 50 BTV (0.10%) → BitView treasury fee wallet
                       │  step b: Jupiter route BTV → USDC (BTV/USDC pool, single hop)
                       ▼
viewer wallet:    ~$249.50 USDC (at $0.005 BTV; 0.10% BitView + ~0.10% LP)

BitView captures: 0.10% of swap input value as BTV fee, accumulated to a treasury BTV-collection wallet.

Event 5 — Brand sponsorship payout (Phase 4+)

brand wallet:      $10,000 USDC
                       │
                       ▼ marketplace escrow
                       │
                       │  $500 (5%) → BitView treasury
                       │  $500 (5%) → streamer wallet (Sponsored co-share)
                       ▼
                  $9,000 → Sponsored-tier distribution vault

distribution lifecycle proceeds; viewers earn USDC, claim USDC.

BitView captures: $500 USDC marketplace fee.

Net BitView treasury accumulation

By currency, over a typical month at 1,000 active streamers:

Currency	Inflow	Outflow	Net
BTV	Swap protocol fees, slashing income, marketplace BTV fees	Buybacks (none in P1–4), LP rebalancing	Slowly accumulates
USDC	Marketplace 5%, Stripe subscription payouts, distribution-creation fees	Operating expenses, bug bounty, audits	Roughly flat to slightly positive
SOL	LP fee income from BTV/SOL pool	Solana network fees from any treasury actions	Marginal positive

Treasury does not systematically accumulate any one currency over years. That would mean we're over-extracting. Revenue ≈ expenses + a sustainable margin is the target.

Scenarios and stress tests

What happens to the system under adverse conditions, and what BitView policy is for each. Published in advance so nobody is surprised.

Scenario A — BTV price drops 80%

Trigger. Broader market downturn, or platform-specific event (key streamer leaves, exploit, regulatory action against BitView).

System behavior.

BTV/USDC pool composition rotates: pool moves toward ~70% BTV. LPs eat IL, including BitView's treasury LP position.
Anti-sybil stake threshold (100 BTV) becomes proportionally cheaper in USD terms. Mild sybil-pressure increase possible.
Fee-discount tiers (10K / 100K / 1M BTV) become cheaper to acquire. Genuine whales accumulate. Net positive for fee revenue if they actually swap more.

BitView policy.

We do not buy back BTV with treasury reserves. Treasury is for runway.
We do consider raising the anti-sybil stake threshold (e.g., 100 → 250 BTV) via emergency multi-sig action with public pre-announcement, to keep the USD-equivalent stake stable.
We do not pause the swap router or any user functions. Markets move; the platform keeps running.

Scenario B — Cashout demand spikes 10×

Trigger. A top-100 streamer ends a large Identity-tier distribution and most viewers want to cash to USDC immediately.

System behavior.

BTV/USDC pool slippage rises sharply. Early viewers get OK fills; later ones get bad fills. Word spreads on Twitter.

BitView policy.

We pre-announce expected high-volume distribution events to LPs as a cohort heads-up (no exact timing). Independent LPs add depth in anticipation.
We do not front-run by adding treasury LP just before the event. That's market-impacting and signals the wrong incentives.
LP incentive program (3% allocation, 24 months) is sized so the pool is deep enough by Phase 2.5–3. If we hit this scenario in Phase 2.0, that's an early-scale risk we accept and document.

Scenario C — Streamer-token rugpull

Trigger. An Identity-tier streamer publicly endorses a third-party scam project, or attempts to dump beyond their on-chain vesting (which the launchpad prevents but they may try via off-chain workarounds).

System behavior.

STREAM token price collapses against BTV.
STREAM/BTV pool drains BTV from the BitView-seeded side as arbitrageurs sell STREAM into it.

BitView policy.

Delist STREAM from the swap router and discovery page within 24h of confirmed evidence.
Pull pool liquidity at next quarterly review.
Streamer's profile is permanently ineligible for Identity-tier relaunch. Native-tier still allowed.
Public post-mortem published.

Scenario D — USDC depeg

Trigger. Circle-side issue, banking incident, or regulatory event (SVB-style 2023 reminder).

System behavior.

BTV/USDC pool now contains de-pegged USDC. Pool LP token holders carry the loss.
Marketplace deposits in USDC are at risk if held in escrow.

BitView policy.

We hold a small USDT contingency line (~$50K) for bridging during brief depegs, not as a permanent treasury position.
Marketplace deposits are settled within 7 days of brand deposit; funds don't sit indefinitely in escrow.
If USDC depeg persists > 30 days, governance vote convenes on whether to add a parallel BTV/USDT pool (at the cost of liquidity fragmentation). Default position: stay USDC-only and rely on the broader Solana ecosystem to recover.

Scenario E — Solana network outage > 6 hours

Trigger. Solana mainnet has had multi-hour outages historically.

System behavior.

Backend cannot finalize distributions, process claims, or route swaps.
Twitch chat tracking continues (off-chain). Accrual ledger keeps updating in MongoDB.
When network recovers, queued operations execute.

BitView policy.

Time-bound parameters (claim windows, clawback timestamps) are extended by the outage duration via on-chain admin function (not a fee change — pure SLA recovery). Pre-announced.
Public status page shows real-time backend + RPC + chain status.
No refunds — viewers and streamers chose a Solana-native platform knowing this risk profile.

Scenario F — Industrial sybil farm captures 30%+ of accruals

Trigger. A sophisticated farm bypasses Layers 1–4 of anti-fraud and silently captures meaningful share before detection.

System behavior.

Real-user-earned ratio drops below 70% for the affected window.
Detection pipeline flags the cohort.

BitView policy.

All flagged wallets soft-suspended within 24h of detection.
Confirmed sybil network gets BTV stake slashed to treasury.
Affected distributions get re-snapshotted: original merkle root remains valid for honest claimers; a supplemental distribution is published with the slashed BTV redistributed pro-rata to flagged-clean wallets in the same cohort.
Public post-mortem with detection methodology improvements.

Open questions

Do we want vesting on viewer accruals (e.g. 30-day linear unlock), or fully liquid at claim? Argument for vesting: smooths supply, reduces dump pressure on streamer tokens. Argument against: friction kills adoption.
Should streamer-token launch require a minimum streamer profile (e.g. 1000+ avg viewers)? Yes initially, relaxed after Phase 4.
Should we cap BTV held by any single wallet to limit governance capture? Probably yes, soft-cap at 5%, hard-cap at 10%.

These are decided by the community after BTV launches; defaults above are the conservative starting position.

The four candidate designs​

Option A — pure stablecoin (USDC) reward​

Option B — pure SOL reward​

Option C — streamer-issued SPL token​

Option D — BTV native token (BitView's own SPL)​

The recommended design — hybrid​

Do we need stablecoin involvement at all?​

The architectural ring model​

What BitView seeds (treasury direct)​

What we don't seed​

How third parties grow the BTV/USDC pool​

Why this beats the alternatives​

So, to answer the original question​

BTV native token​

Supply and allocation (proposal)​

Utility (deep dive)​

1. Anti-sybil stake​

2. Fee discount​

3. Governance lock-up (Phase 5+)​

4. Sponsorship marketplace currency (Phase 4+)​

What BTV explicitly does NOT do​

Streamer-token mechanics (Identity tier)​

Creator royalty​

Non-fungible loyalty layer (NFT drops)​

Liquidity policy​

Position sizing​

Rebalancing rules​

What we will not do with treasury​

Money flow accounting​

Event 1 — Streamer funds a Native-tier distribution​

Event 2 — Viewer accrues during stream​

Event 3 — Distribution finalizes, viewer claims​

Event 4 — Viewer cashes out​

Event 5 — Brand sponsorship payout (Phase 4+)​

Net BitView treasury accumulation​

Scenarios and stress tests​

Scenario A — BTV price drops 80%​

Scenario B — Cashout demand spikes 10×​

Scenario C — Streamer-token rugpull​

Scenario D — USDC depeg​

Scenario E — Solana network outage > 6 hours​

Scenario F — Industrial sybil farm captures 30%+ of accruals​

Open questions​

The four candidate designs

Option A — pure stablecoin (USDC) reward

Option B — pure SOL reward

Option C — streamer-issued SPL token

Option D — BTV native token (BitView's own SPL)

The recommended design — hybrid

Do we need stablecoin involvement at all?

The architectural ring model

What BitView seeds (treasury direct)

What we don't seed

How third parties grow the BTV/USDC pool

Why this beats the alternatives

So, to answer the original question

BTV native token

Supply and allocation (proposal)

Utility (deep dive)

1. Anti-sybil stake

2. Fee discount

3. Governance lock-up (Phase 5+)

4. Sponsorship marketplace currency (Phase 4+)

What BTV explicitly does NOT do

Streamer-token mechanics (Identity tier)

Creator royalty

Non-fungible loyalty layer (NFT drops)

Liquidity policy

Position sizing

Rebalancing rules

What we will not do with treasury

Money flow accounting

Event 1 — Streamer funds a Native-tier distribution

Event 2 — Viewer accrues during stream

Event 3 — Distribution finalizes, viewer claims

Event 4 — Viewer cashes out

Event 5 — Brand sponsorship payout (Phase 4+)

Net BitView treasury accumulation

Scenarios and stress tests

Scenario A — BTV price drops 80%

Scenario B — Cashout demand spikes 10×

Scenario C — Streamer-token rugpull

Scenario D — USDC depeg

Scenario E — Solana network outage > 6 hours

Scenario F — Industrial sybil farm captures 30%+ of accruals

Open questions