Refreshing Agoric Tokenomics: BLD as the Foundation

General
1

Over the past few weeks, the Agoric team, DCF, and advisors have been working on updates to Agoric’s fee and token model. The goal is simple: Make the network sustainable, give developers flexibility, and keep costs predictable for users.

Now that the design is taking shape, we want to share it with you. This post explains the approach, lays out the key ideas, and asks for your feedback

Why a Refresh?

The original Agoric tokenomics design contemplated a two token system: BLD and IST. In the wake of sunsetting IST, this post proposes a new tokenomics that aligns BLD with Agoric Orchestration.

On most blockchains, users pay directly to run contracts. This creates friction: people must hold gas tokens for every chain and service they touch, just to use an app. It also shifts costs onto users even though contracts and developers are the ones consuming resources. Together, these issues make apps harder to use and discourage broader adoption.

Agoric’s orchestration model changes this. Instead of running only on one chain, orchestration contracts connect across many chains and services. To make that work, they need steady, reliable funding and a token model that puts costs where they belong. That means rethinking the basics: who pays, how payments are made, and where the fees go.

Key Ideas

The refreshed model is built around a few simple but powerful ideas. Each one is designed to make the network easier to use, fairer for developers and users, and more sustainable over time. Together, they show how BLD becomes the foundation for gas, staking, and orchestration on Agoric.

  • One Token, One Economy
    BLD becomes the single token for gas, staking, and Orchestration. This simplifies the developer experience and concentrates demand on BLD.

  • Users Pay Postage, Apps Pay Costs

    • Users pay a small “postage” fee to deliver a message.

    • Apps (or contracts) cover the costs of execution and Orchestration.

    • This puts responsibility where it belongs: on the services that consume the resources.

  • The Multi-Block Superpower (Async by Design)
    Other blockchains are designed for programs that start and finish in a single block. Human and business processes don’t work that way. Agoric is unique in supporting multi-block, asynchronous programs - software that can span blocks, chains, and even off-chain services. This is what makes Orchestration possible, and why Agoric can handle apps at the scale and complexity of the real world.

    • If funds run low, local logic keeps running.
    • Cross-chain steps are queued and only execute once funded.
    • This avoids failed calls while keeping apps running smoothly.

  • Pursers and the Comptroller (tentative names)

    • Each app has a Purser, an infrastructure agent that manages its “gas purse” and ensures Orchestration is funded with the right tokens.

    • At the network level, the Comptroller aggregates and rebalances fee tokens, funds cross-chain Orchestration, and directs surplus according to BLD governance (e.g., community pool, burn, or fees to BLD staker).

  • Contract Finances
    Contracts charge users according to their business model. In order to run on Agoric, they must meet two commitments at launch: a contract stake (a deposit that shows commitment and deters spam) and gas funds to cover deployment and activity. If funds run low, synchronous operations can continue briefly, but async actions pause until replenished. Persistent non-payment or abuse is handled by governance through penalties such as slashing or termination.

How are Fees Captured?

Under this refreshed model, BLD stakers capture value through multiple fee flows:

  • Postage fees → paid by users.

  • Execution & storage costs → paid by apps.

  • Orchestration fees → paid by apps, including gas fees for remote and cross-chain operations. The system manages remote gas and charges a commission above raw cost. Example: a remote call might cost 20 gwei in Ethereum gas, and Agoric charges 24 gwei, the extra 4 gwei is retained as a commission.

  • All fees and commissions → aggregated and burned or distributed to BLD stakers and validators.

This design links network usage directly to staking yield and ties the success of apps and orchestration activity to BLD demand.

What are the Benefits?

This refreshed model is designed to make Agoric simpler for users, more rewarding for stakers, and more powerful for developers and the network as a whole.

  • Value capture for BLD holders: Orchestration activity and contract operations drive direct demand for BLD, linking token value to network use

  • Simpler for users: Instead of unpredictable execution costs, users just pay a clear, predictable postage fee

  • Empowering for developers: Orchestration enables new applications and flexible business models, whether they come from Web2 or Web3. Agoric’s orchestration-first design enables use cases not possible on other chains

  • Sustainable for the network: Contract stakes, gas purses, and the Purser system ensure operations are funded and accountable

In Conclusion

This refresh is just the starting point. By positioning BLD as the center of our ecosystem and firmly linking it to Orchestration, we’re laying the foundation for a more scalable, flexible, and user-friendly network. The next phases aim to include liquidity improvements, expanded listings, and structured buyback planning, which will build on this alignment. And with Orchestration in full gear, products built on Agoric like Ymax are better positioned to reach their full potential and benefit the users, the developers, and the ecosystem as a whole.

Your feedback now will help shape how we get there. Join the discussion and help us chart Agoric’s path forward.

4 Likes
2

Awesome, please proceed with the change ASAP. We are waiting for roadmap changes and website refresh at the same time. Also new whitepaper on Agoric. Hopefully token price recovers soon.

2 Likes
3

This makes sense. What are the timelines you are thinking of for changes to be implemented? Is there any development work needed from Agoric?

1 Like
4

Aye other changes are in progress. I will first appreciate the fine bouquet of getting to cosmos-sdk 0.50 for at least a day or two.

2 Likes
5

It seems like there are no Agoric Systems OpCo fees being charged, all fees will be distributed to BLD stakers for them to decide what to do, is that right?

6

Yes, there is needed dev work for the complete idea. For example, the Purser will need to take payments from the contract it manages and convert it to BLD to cover gas costs. The Comptroller will acquire gas tokens as needed, and potentially buy/burn BLD, etc. (more tomorrow)

1 Like
7

These are very strong changes. The concept is flawless. We are waiting for more specific numbers on burning and interest for stakers❤️

2 Likes
8

Thank you Dean. Given YMAX is the focus now, are you expecting this to go live before YMAX, or after YMAX (i.e. after Q1)? If before YMAX, will this dev work push back the Q1 estimate for YMAX?

11

For BLD tokenomics, that’s the intent. It’s all BLD-focused.

As the Comptroller gets more cleverness, there might be 3rd party services (oracles, swaps, etc.) including ones from us that get paid for. That would all be in future upgrades that get their own governance then.

1 Like
12

Great question. Ymax is our priority! It’s critical to drive activity and to “dogfood” Orchestration changes and the tokenomic model. That way we reduce early overengineering.

For example, we have Orchestration features purpose built for Ymax that we would generalize for other uses once they stabilize and show their value. Similarly, we would model the tokenomics behavior in Ymax to make sure it’s simple and fair for app developers and the chain. For example, if the model is that X% of BLD fees get burned, we could do that in Ymax or library code until the Purser is built to enforce it.

3 Likes
13

/blush Well I encourage finding flaws or improvements regardless :). That’s why we are presenting in stages!

I hear you on the modeling. In the preliminary models, commission on cross-chain fee revenue could be the major factor for a while. For example, a txn for .5BLD could trigger a $5 txn on Arbitrum. Even 5% of that $5 dominates the txn cost. We will need to measure some real (e.g., Ymax beta) activity to refine the data and improve those models.

1 Like
14

Do you plan to cap the maximum issuance, say at 1 billion tokens, to increase value?

15

Thank you for your response! Then a few more questions:

1. What are the staking parameters and target APR for stakers from net fees (without inflation), and what part of the emission goes to validators/security?

2. Will there be a “real-time fee flows” dashboard (postage/execution/orchestration), scheduled burn tranches, and Comptroller reports (requests, executions, rejections, and average lag)?

3. Is there a “rent” for long-lived orchestration state and GC/archiving policy?

And on the bottlenecks:

1. Purser has to buy BLD to pay for gas, but where is the liquidity? If BLD is illiquid (which it is), any large purchase will cause a huge slippage.

2. Low activity → low fees → low staking APR → mass unstaking → BLD price drop → higher gas fees in BLD → apps shut down → even less activity. Are there any “stabilizers” that can stop this spiral? A minimum APR? Subsidies?

3. If BLD grows (which we want), the gas costs of all applications also grow proportionally. What kind of business can plan if its costs can grow 10x in a month?

4. The entire system depends on the accuracy of prices in Oracle. What if the prices of BLD or gas tokens are manipulated? What if Oracle is temporarily unavailable?

Sorry for my English, I’m writing this through a translator :slight_smile:

3 Likes
16

Fundamentally, new emissions is how the chain rewards stakers and validators to secure and operate the chain. So instead of capping issuance, the goal is for the chain to convert revenue into BLD consumption (e.g., burn, distribution, or community use) to offset the emissions. When that exceeds the emissions, then BLD would be net deflationary. We are looking at (still simple) modeling for what that would take.

Changing to a hard cap would require changes to network beyond the scope of what we are trying to do now. Happy to hear proposals for that.

BTW if there’s anyone who wants to volunteer their own models for this, by all means reach out.

17

Thank you for the comprehensive answer. Until recently, this model was followed in Polkadot, but eventually a decision was made to limit issuance in order to become more attractive for investments.

1 Like
18

Implementing deflationary structure on BLD token issuance (probably burning) will be helpful. Make it scarce throughout long term.

3 Likes
19

Stop the inflation and fix the max supply or the tokenomic is be very bad like price

The team must fix max supply

1 Like
20

Welcome Motta! What then is the incentive for stakers/validators? The goal of this proposed direction is for that to to be covered by chain revenue. That seems the critical element that enables fixing the supply.

1 Like
21

DYDX has implemented an incentive model through payouts in stablecoins, distributed as a percentage of the protocol’s profits.

1 Like
24

That’s a fundamental difference in tokenomics. DYDX converts token value into stablecoins, which creates sell pressure. Agoric’s model creates direct BLD demand through orchestration - every transaction needs BLD. This concentrates value instead of diluting it.

P.S: DYDX also closed the ETH bridge and 45,000 people lost their money. Don’t use this command as an example, please)

1 Like