The first type consists of projects that are only strong in narrative. Token supply is often large, distribution is unclear, and its utility is minimal — ultimately, the price only moves due to hype, rather than real usage. Once sentiment drops, liquidity vanishes too.
The second type is projects that aim to build an economic system within their own ecosystem. OpenLedger ($OPEN) falls into this category, as its focus isn't just on the 'AI narrative', but on how data and AI models are actually utilized and incentivized within the network.
On the supply side, $OPEN has a structure of around 1 billion tokens, with the majority allocated to the ecosystem and community (over 60%). Investors and the team are still in the game but are locked in with long-term vesting. This differs from models where a large supply is initially circulated to insiders or lacks transparency, which usually creates quick sell pressure at the beginning of a cycle.
Simply put, it's not about being 'cheap or expensive', but rather how the pressure of supply vs demand will meet in the market. If adoption outpaces the unlock of supply, the price could get a re-rating. Conversely, if the opposite happens, the price will likely be pressured by the influx of tokens entering the market.
For the analyst scenario, if adoption is slow, the conservative area sits around $0.2–$0.5. If the ecosystem starts being used steadily, a realistic range could develop to $1–$2. And if the AI narrative truly enters the next big expansion phase, some speculative models place potential above $3, depending on how strong the on-chain demand forms.
I'm still keeping an eye on @OpenLedger https://www.binance.com/id/square/profile/openledger because in crypto, what separates a project that survives from one that doesn’t isn’t the initial hype, but whether the continuously unlocking supply can be absorbed by real usage within its ecosystem.