#signdigitalsovereigninfra $SIGN I remember watching identity-related tokens barely move even when integrations were increasing. At first I thought the market just didn’t value identity. Later it felt more like the output was hard to price.
With $SIGN, the shift seems to be from owning data to owning proof about it. Instead of sharing raw information, participants create attestations, simple verifiable claims that others can check later. A bank, a government office, or a contractor signs something, and that record becomes reusable across systems.
The token likely sits around verification and coordination, not storage. Fees come from creating or validating these proofs. But activity here isn’t constant. It’s event-driven. That creates a retention problem. Usage might spike during approvals, then go quiet.
So I keep asking who keeps paying after the first use. If participation isn’t recurring, token demand stays thin, especially if supply unlocks continue.
As a trader, I’d watch for repeated attestations across workflows and steady fee flow. If usage becomes routine rather than narrative-driven, that’s when it starts to matter. Until then, the story still feels ahead of the data.