On January 23, Optimism DAO initiated a governance vote on whether to use 50% of the revenue from the Superchain network for continuous repurchase of OP in the secondary market. The voting window opened on January 23 and is expected to close on January 28. This proposal directly ties the network's real income to the price of the governance token, igniting a debate within the community about whether to use long-term cash flow for buying support: on one side are those hoping to amplify FOMO in the new market cycle, while on the other are those concerned about encroaching on budgets for security, development, and ecosystem growth. The bigger question currently is whether this seemingly mature repurchase mechanism can truly reshape OP's valuation anchor and market expectations in the new cycle environment described by institutions like Coinbase as having "cleared leverage and a more robust structure," rather than becoming an emotional price experiment.

Superchain Aims to Turn Revenue into Monthly Buying Support

● The core design of the proposal is to allocate 50% of the network revenue from Optimism Superchain for monthly repurchases of OP governance tokens in the secondary market, rather than conducting a one-time, node-based concentrated operation. This means the DAO is attempting to establish a long-term, predictable buying curve that synchronizes the repurchase rhythm with the network's actual income, rather than relying on a single "violent bottoming" to stimulate the market, focusing more on institutionalizing and automating the use of protocol income.

● Unlike previous paths that leaned towards "accumulating cash and building," this proposal resembles a governance-oriented reversal: shifting from prioritizing the expansion of the treasury, increasing ecosystem subsidies, and infrastructure investment, to using a significant portion of cash flow to continuously support the token price. Logically, this switches from "first expanding the pie and then discussing value return" to "simultaneously considering price performance and ecosystem expansion," publicly laying out the priority order of the DAO's balance sheet.

● The voting officially started on January 23 and is expected to end on January 28. This is not a simple technical parameter upgrade but a referendum on a significant rearrangement of fiscal budgets and balance sheets. Future revenue distribution for Superchain will redraw lines between security spending, R&D investment, ecosystem incentives, and protocol treasury accumulation, and this repurchase proposal essentially draws a rough line on the blueprint for a "50% permanent buying support," leaving the community to decide whether to sign off.

Community Division: Boosting Token Price or Squandering Resources

● Supporters believe that during the brewing phase of a new crypto cycle, income-driven long-term repurchases can amplify market FOMO: on one hand, a certain buying support will strengthen the narrative of OP as a "cash flow asset," raising the valuation center; on the other hand, the upward movement of price and market cap is expected to attract more governance participants, shifting DAO voting from a minority representative game to a broader token holder group, forming a positive feedback loop of "price—governance participation—ecosystem attention."

● Opponents' concerns focus on opportunity costs: locking 50% of network revenue into token buybacks means a significant reduction in the budget available for developer incentives, ecosystem subsidies, security and audit expenses, and cross-chain expansion. For L2s still in a fierce competition phase, missing a developer subsidy or user incentive could mean losing the opportunity for the next blockbuster application or new chain onboarding; to them, this feels more like betting "current prices" with "future growth."

● There is also a clear misalignment in time and risk preferences between DAO representatives and ordinary token holders. Representatives often focus more on the ecological health and protocol moat over several years, while retail and short-term funds care more about the price curve and drawdown risks in the coming months. This preference difference is amplified in governance voting into a clash of two narratives: betting on "high elasticity, high volatility price tools," or insisting on "slow but steady protocol accumulation," with the voting buttons reflecting fundamental disagreements among participants regarding cycle length and risk tolerance.

Repurchase After Clearing Leverage: Riding the Trend or Going Against It

● According to the Coinbase Institutional "Charting Crypto" report, as we enter the beginning of 2026, overall leverage in the crypto market has significantly cleared, with excessive speculative positions being eliminated, and the market structure is more robust compared to the previous high-leverage phase. This means that policy-driven benefits and fundamental narratives are more easily priced in by funds at present, rather than being drowned out by extreme leverage sentiment, leaving a clearer pricing window for proposals like Optimism's that "tell stories with real income."

● In the past 24 hours, the entire contract market saw liquidations of about $151 million, with long positions liquidated at approximately $90.25 million, as the leverage chain was concentratedly cut, shifting risk preference from extreme speculation to a more restrained "light leverage, heavy narrative." In this environment, FOMO is no longer just greed for the next limit-up K-line but also combines with a rush to see "who can tell a more verifiable cash flow story," with the repurchase mechanism attempting to occupy this psychological high ground.

● Against the backdrop of cooling leverage and a shifting emotional focus, introducing the institutional narrative of "long-term repurchase" is likely to amplify funds' attention on OP and quietly change the chip structure: short-term speculators may use repurchase expectations for swings, while long-term funds may view OP as a configuration target supported by cash flow. As the repurchase mechanism continues to operate, more chips will be absorbed by the treasury and steadfast holders, with the circulating structure potentially shifting from "high turnover, high noise" to "low turnover, more institutionalized."

OP's Value Anchor Shifts from Expectation to Cash Flow Experiment

● Previously, OP's core narrative heavily relied on airdrops, ecosystem subsidies, and scaling stories, with prices driven more by expectations of "how many new projects and users will come in the future," and the token itself being relatively loosely connected to current real cash flow. The "income repurchase" mechanism attempts to pull OP from being a purely narrative token towards a cash flow experiment linked to actual network income, providing a firmer anchor for token value through the protocol's profitability.

● Returning protocol income to token holders lies between "equity dividend expectations" and "price support tools" in valuation models. Once the repurchase has continuity and transparency, the market may attempt to define OP with a similar implicit yield based on "expected annual repurchase scale / circulating market cap"; however, if income is highly volatile and the repurchase rhythm is unstable, it resembles a temporary price support measure, making it difficult to truly change the long-term discount model, only providing some buffer in a bear market.

● Once the repurchase mechanism is finalized and executed, the market will be forced to reassess the relationship between on-chain income, TVL, ecosystem activity and OP price: seasonal fluctuations in income, competition in the Gas market, and the distribution of applications within Superchain will all be incorporated into the long-term pricing framework. OP's valuation range will no longer be determined solely by "whether the next hot track can take off," but will also need to consider "how much sustainable cash flow Superchain can create and how much of that is committed to returning to tokens," which will drive the market to update its consensus on reasonable price-earnings ratios, discount rates, and risk premiums.

Opportunity Cost of Repurchase: Who Gives Way to Developers, Security, and Expansion

● From a fiscal perspective, Superchain's revenue needs to be allocated across multiple dimensions: security and audit spending ensure network operation and attack resistance, R&D investment supports future technology routes and performance optimization, ecosystem incentives and developer subsidies attract new applications and new chains, while protocol treasury accumulation reserves ammunition for potential black swans and strategic opportunities. These four budget areas compete with each other, and every dollar allocated to the repurchase pool means compression of space in other dimensions.

● Once 50% of revenue is rigidly locked for repurchase, Optimism may find itself in a more passive position when competing with other L2s for developers and users: reduced developer subsidy amounts, decreased user incentive intensity, and less attractive conditions for potential new chains and cross-chain partners. In a rapidly accelerating L2 competition landscape, missing a strong ecosystem incentive could mean losing a critical narrative window.

● A more severe issue is the reversal of cycles. If a bear market restarts or competition intensifies further, will this quasi-rigid commitment to the repurchase ratio backfire on the project's elasticity and survival space? When income declines, security budgets tighten, and the risk of developer attrition increases, does the DAO have the political capital to modify or even suspend repurchase terms, or will it be held hostage by "commitments to token holders," thus being forced to direct half of its income to secondary market buying support when cash reserves are most needed?

Voting Countdown: OP Stands at the Crossroads of Governance and Price

The OP repurchase proposal is essentially both a price tool and a governance choice: it requires Optimism to provide a public, institutional answer to the "relationship between protocol cash flow and tokens"—whether future cash flow primarily serves to expand the ecosystem and protect the moat, or more directly rewards token holders, thus using price performance to validate the correctness of this path. Superchain is writing its fiscal philosophy into the on-chain history through a public vote.

Regardless of whether the proposal ultimately passes, Superchain must clearly position itself between "growing the pie" and "rewarding token holders": choosing the former means continuing to bet on long-term ecosystem expansion, accepting that short-term prices may not be attractive; choosing the latter means significantly leaning towards capital even when competition is unclear, betting that OP can seize the narrative high ground in the next market cycle. What the market will observe next is not just the voting result itself, but also the actual performance of on-chain income, and the transparency and flexibility of repurchase execution.

In the coming quarters, whether OP will be reshaped by the market into a role closer to "cash flow asset" or continue to fluctuate within rotating narratives will depend on three points: whether Superchain's income can sustain growth and withstand cyclical tests, whether the DAO can maintain maneuvering space between repurchase and fiscal security, and whether token holders are willing to take a longer time to verify the ultimate returns and costs of this "income repurchase gamble."

Join our community to discuss and grow stronger together!
Official Telegram community: https://t.me/aicoincn
AiCoin Chinese Twitter: https://x.com/AiCoinzh

OKX benefits group: https://aicoin.com/link/chat?cid=l61eM4owQ
Binance benefits group: https://aicoin.com/link/chat?cid=ynr7d1P6Z

免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。