\n| M<\/td>\n | Market value of coins in circulation<\/td>\n | Scirc \u00d7 P0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n Formula for emission after the rebase:<\/p>\n Emission after the rebase = emission before the rebase \/ compression ratio. That is, S_after = S_before \/ R.<\/em><\/p>\nFormula for the calculated price after the rebase:<\/p>\n Price after the rebase = price before the rebase \u00d7 compression ratio. That is, P_after = P_before \u00d7 R.<\/em><\/p>\nFormula for preserving the value of a user’s balance:<\/p>\n Value before the rebase = Q \u00d7 P0. Value after the rebase = (Q \/ R) \u00d7 (P0 \u00d7 R). These two amounts are equal.<\/em><\/p>\nFormula for the market value of coins in circulation:<\/p>\n M = Scirc \u00d7 P0 = (Scirc \/ R) \u00d7 (P0 \u00d7 R). With a correct rebase, M does not change.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n| Indicator<\/td>\n | Before rebase<\/td>\n | After 1000:1<\/td>\n | After 10000:1<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| Maximum emission<\/td>\n | 92,000,000,000 DEL<\/td>\n | 92,000,000 DEL<\/td>\n | 9,200,000 DEL<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| Coins in circulation<\/td>\n | approximately 26,000,000,000 DEL<\/td>\n | approximately 26,000,000 DEL<\/td>\n | approximately 2,600,000 DEL<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| Calculated price at P0 = 0.1 RUB<\/td>\n | 0.1 RUB<\/td>\n | 100 RUB<\/td>\n | 1000 RUB<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| Value of coins in circulation<\/td>\n | about 2.6 billion RUB<\/td>\n | about 2.6 billion RUB<\/td>\n | about 2.6 billion RUB<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| Value of maximum emission<\/td>\n | about 9.2 billion RUB<\/td>\n | about 9.2 billion RUB<\/td>\n | about 9.2 billion RUB<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n This table shows the main fact: neither option changes capitalization by itself. Therefore, the final choice must be based on secondary but very important consequences: perception, convenience, liquidity, error risks, interface operation, and the quality of the explanation to the market.<\/p>\n Scenario A: 1000:1 rebase<\/h2>\nThe 1000:1 scenario involves removing three zeros and moves the DEL economy from the zone of billions of coins to the zone of tens of millions.<\/p>\n After the rebase, the indicators will look as follows:<\/p>\n \n\n\n| Indicator<\/td>\n | Calculation<\/td>\n | Result<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| Maximum emission<\/td>\n | 92,000,000,000 \/ 1000<\/td>\n | 92,000,000 DEL<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| Coins in circulation<\/td>\n | approximately 26,000,000,000 \/ 1000<\/td>\n | approximately 26,000,000 DEL<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| Price of one DEL<\/td>\n | 0.1 \u00d7 1000<\/td>\n | about 100 RUB<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| Circulation capitalization<\/td>\n | 26,000,000 \u00d7 100<\/td>\n | about 2.6 billion RUB<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| Full valuation at maximum<\/td>\n | 92,000,000 \u00d7 100<\/td>\n | about 9.2 billion RUB<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n The main advantage of this option is that it solves the problem of excess zeros without creating a new psychological problem of a high price.<\/p>\n For most users, a price of about 100 rubles is perceived naturally. The coin no longer looks «penny,» yet it remains accessible.<\/p>\n \n\n\n| Example<\/td>\n | Before rebase<\/td>\n | After 1000:1<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| User balance<\/td>\n | 500,000 DEL<\/td>\n | 500 DEL<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| Price of one DEL<\/td>\n | 0.1 RUB<\/td>\n | 100 RUB<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| Balance value<\/td>\n | 50,000 RUB<\/td>\n | 50,000 RUB<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| User-token reserve<\/td>\n | 80,000,000 DEL<\/td>\n | 80,000 DEL<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| Sale by a large holder<\/td>\n | 5,000,000 DEL<\/td>\n | 5,000 DEL<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n The 1000:1 option is also convenient for exchanges, validators, and owners of user tokens. After recalculation, reserves and balances remain large enough to avoid problems with a large number of fractional values.<\/p>\n A disadvantage of the scenario can be considered the less pronounced scarcity effect compared with the 10000:1 option. However, a maximum emission of 92 million coins already looks sufficiently limited and does not create a sense of excess supply.<\/p>\n Interim conclusion:<\/p>\n 1000:1 eliminates the main shortcomings of the current model and preserves a comfortable price zone for most market participants.<\/p>\n Scenario B: 10000:1 rebase<\/h2>\nThe 10000:1 scenario involves removing four zeros.<\/p>\n After recalculation, the indicators will be as follows:<\/p>\n \n\n\n| Indicator<\/td>\n | Calculation<\/td>\n | Result<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| Maximum emission<\/td>\n | 92,000,000,000 \/ 10000<\/td>\n | 9,200,000 DEL<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| Coins in circulation<\/td>\n | approximately 26,000,000,000 \/ 10000<\/td>\n | approximately 2,600,000 DEL<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| Price of one DEL<\/td>\n | 0.1 \u00d7 10000<\/td>\n | about 1000 RUB<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| Circulation capitalization<\/td>\n | 2,600,000 \u00d7 1000<\/td>\n | about 2.6 billion RUB<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| Full valuation at maximum<\/td>\n | 9,200,000 \u00d7 1000<\/td>\n | about 9.2 billion RUB<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n The main advantage of this scenario is a strong scarcity effect. A maximum emission of less than 10 million coins looks more attractive from a marketing standpoint and is easier to perceive in presentations for investors. However, along with this comes a number of additional risks. A price of about 1000 rubles may be perceived as high. Despite the ability to buy fractional parts of a coin, many users prefer to own whole units of an asset.<\/p>\n \n\n\n| Example<\/td>\n | Before rebase<\/td>\n | After 10000:1<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| User balance<\/td>\n | 500,000 DEL<\/td>\n | 50 DEL<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| Price of one DEL<\/td>\n | 0.1 RUB<\/td>\n | 1000 RUB<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| Balance value<\/td>\n | 50,000 RUB<\/td>\n | 50,000 RUB<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| User-token reserve<\/td>\n | 80,000,000 DEL<\/td>\n | 8,000 DEL<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| Sale by a large holder<\/td>\n | 5,000,000 DEL<\/td>\n | 500 DEL<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n An additional consequence is the growth in the number of fractional values in wallets, user tokens, and internal calculations.<\/p>\n From a technical standpoint, these issues are solvable, but they require more complex preparation of interfaces and communication with users.<\/p>\n Interim conclusion: 10000:1 strengthens the image of scarcity but at the same time increases the risks of misunderstanding, complicates price perception, and reduces the sense of the coin’s accessibility.<\/p>\n Economic comparison of the options<\/h2>\nThe comparison must start with the main point: both scenarios preserve market value with a correct rebase. Therefore, one cannot choose an option only because the price of a single coin is higher afterward. A high price per unit does not mean the project has grown.<\/p>\n \n\n\n| Criterion<\/td>\n | 1000:1<\/td>\n | 10000:1<\/td>\n | Assessment<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| Removal of excess zeros<\/td>\n | Yes, removes three zeros and brings circulation to 26 million<\/td>\n | Yes, removes four zeros and brings circulation to 2.6 million<\/td>\n | Both solve the problem<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| Price of one coin<\/td>\n | About 100 RUB<\/td>\n | About 1000 RUB<\/td>\n | 100 RUB is simpler for the mass user<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| Image of scarcity<\/td>\n | Strong but moderate<\/td>\n | Very strong<\/td>\n | Advantage to 10000:1<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| Convenience of buying whole coins<\/td>\n | High<\/td>\n | Medium<\/td>\n | Advantage to 1000:1<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| Risk of fractional balances<\/td>\n | Low<\/td>\n | Medium or high for small holders<\/td>\n | Advantage to 1000:1<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| Convenience of user tokens<\/td>\n | Softer compression<\/td>\n | Harsher compression<\/td>\n | Advantage to 1000:1<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| Reputational risk<\/td>\n | Lower: looks like a technically sound optimization<\/td>\n | Higher: may look like an attempt to make the coin expensive<\/td>\n | Advantage to 1000:1<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| Long-term scalability<\/td>\n | Sufficient<\/td>\n | Maximum<\/td>\n | Slight advantage to 10000:1<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n For liquidity, it is important to understand the difference between ruble volume and the number of coins. If 26 million rubles are bought and sold per day, the economic volume is the same in both options. But the visible number of coins differs.<\/p>\n \n\n\n| Daily turnover in rubles<\/td>\n | Before rebase at 0.1 RUB<\/td>\n | After 1000:1 at 100 RUB<\/td>\n | After 10000:1 at 1000 RUB<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| 5.2 million RUB<\/td>\n | 52,000,000 DEL<\/td>\n | 52,000 DEL<\/td>\n | 5,200 DEL<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| 26 million RUB<\/td>\n | 260,000,000 DEL<\/td>\n | 260,000 DEL<\/td>\n | 26,000 DEL<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| 78 million RUB<\/td>\n | 780,000,000 DEL<\/td>\n | 780,000 DEL<\/td>\n | 78,000 DEL<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n The 10000:1 option makes exchange statistics in coins 10 times smaller than the 1000:1 option. For a professional this does not matter, because they look at volume in money and order-book depth. For an ordinary person, a low number of coins in circulation may look like lower activity. This is not a decisive factor, but it is a real factor in perception.<\/p>\n It is also important to compare psychological price levels. With 1000:1, the coin lands in the area of 100 rubles. This is an understandable price: it is easy to compare, easy to count, and easy to explain. With 10000:1, the coin lands in the area of 1000 rubles. This looks more solid but may already be perceived as an expensive unit.<\/p>\n \n\n\n| Price zone<\/td>\n | How it is usually perceived<\/td>\n | Relation to the options<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| 0.1 RUB<\/td>\n | Too cheap, penny-like, overloaded with zeros<\/td>\n | Current model<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| 10\u201350 RUB<\/td>\n | Accessible, but may still seem cheap<\/td>\n | Possible after a drop following 1000:1<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| 100\u2013300 RUB<\/td>\n | Clear and reasonably serious price<\/td>\n | Base zone for 1000:1<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| 1000 RUB and above<\/td>\n | Solid, but expensive for some users<\/td>\n | Base zone for 10000:1<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n Interim conclusion.<\/strong> On pure image of scarcity, 10000:1 wins. On the totality of convenience, mass perception, trading, user tokens, and reputational risks, 1000:1 looks more sustainable.<\/p>\nImpact on users and price psychology<\/h2>\nIn cryptocurrencies, decisions are often made emotionally. A user evaluates an asset not only by capitalization or technology, but also by the price of a single coin, the number of coins in the balance, and the overall sense of accessibility.<\/p>\n Today DEL faces the opposite problem \u2014 the price looks too low. A rebase makes it possible to correct this effect. However, it is important not to move from one extreme to another. A price of about 100 rubles is in a comfortable psychological zone. A user can easily buy 1, 10, or 100 coins and perceive them as a full-fledged asset. A price of about 1000 rubles creates a more premium image but increases the likelihood that part of the audience will begin to consider the coin too expensive.<\/p>\n For different groups of participants, the consequences look as follows:<\/p>\n \n\n\n| Group of participants<\/td>\n | What matters to them<\/td>\n | 1000:1<\/td>\n | 10000:1<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| Ordinary new users<\/td>\n | Understand the price and buy without fear of making a mistake<\/td>\n | A price of about 100 RUB is simpler and more accessible<\/td>\n | A price of about 1000 RUB may seem expensive<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| Retail investors<\/td>\n | The feeling of owning whole coins<\/td>\n | Easier to buy 1, 10, 100 DEL<\/td>\n | More often need to buy fractions of DEL<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| Large holders<\/td>\n | Preserving their share and reducing visual pressure from large sales<\/td>\n | There is an effect<\/td>\n | The effect is stronger<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| Validators and delegators<\/td>\n | Preserving shares and rewards<\/td>\n | Easier to explain without small fractions<\/td>\n | More explanations about fractions needed<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| Traders<\/td>\n | A clear chart and normal order-book depth<\/td>\n | A balanced price step<\/td>\n | A higher unit price and fewer coins in circulation possible<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| Partners and investors<\/td>\n | Clear economics and the absence of signs of manipulation<\/td>\n | Looks like a moderate optimization<\/td>\n | Strong arguments needed so it does not look like an artificial increase<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n For the network’s growth, it is important to maintain a balance between scarcity and accessibility.<\/p>\n By this criterion, the 1000:1 option looks more sustainable.<\/p>\n Exchanges, liquidity, and trading<\/h2>\nFor exchanges and participants who maintain buy and sell orders, not only the price and number of coins matter. Market depth, the number of active participants, the clarity of the chart, the absence of sharp price gaps, and infrastructure readiness for the rebase also matter.<\/p>\n Adding a coin to an exchange and maintaining trading are usually assessed by several practical signs: sufficient demand, a clear project history, a clean legal and technical structure, a stable network, the absence of chaos in circulation, a normal order book, and clear rules for updating the coin.<\/p>\n The rebase itself does not make the coin more liquid. It can make the price more convenient and improve the first impression, but real liquidity comes from demand, trust, community activity, and professional support of trading.<\/p>\n \n\n\n| Factor for exchanges and trading<\/td>\n | Impact of 1000:1<\/td>\n | Impact of 10000:1<\/td>\n | Comment<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| Price of one coin<\/td>\n | Clear zone of about 100 RUB<\/td>\n | High zone of about 1000 RUB<\/td>\n | Both zones are technically acceptable, but 100 RUB is simpler for a broad audience<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| Number of coins in circulation<\/td>\n | About 26 million<\/td>\n | About 2.6 million<\/td>\n | Neither value is overloaded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| Visible daily turnover in DEL<\/td>\n | Higher<\/td>\n | 10 times lower<\/td>\n | For ordinary users, 1000:1 may look more active<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| Order-book depth<\/td>\n | Depends on money in the book, not the number of coins<\/td>\n | Depends on money in the book, not the number of coins<\/td>\n | A rebase does not replace work on liquidity<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| Risk of order error<\/td>\n | Decreases substantially<\/td>\n | Decreases, but the post-rebase price requires more explanation<\/td>\n | Both options require a trading pause and price labeling before and after the rebase<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| Technical integration<\/td>\n | Simpler due to fewer fractions<\/td>\n | Harder due to a stricter scale<\/td>\n | Especially important for wallets and user tokens<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n For the order book, the difference between the best buy price and the best sell price matters. If, after the rebase, the price becomes too high for an ordinary user, the number of small orders may decrease. This will not necessarily happen, but the risk is higher with 10000:1.<\/p>\n Risks and ways to reduce them<\/h2>\nAny rebase has risks. The main risk lies in execution: users may misunderstand the compression of coins, exchanges may fail to synchronize the update, orders placed before the rebase may remain active, and some participants may perceive the operation as an attempt to artificially raise the price.<\/p>\n Below, a scale from 1 to 5 is used. Probability shows how likely the risk is to materialize. Impact shows how severe the damage would be. The overall risk level equals the product of probability and impact.<\/p>\n Risk matrix for the 1000:1 option<\/h3>\n\n\n\n| Risk<\/td>\n | Probability<\/td>\n | Impact<\/td>\n | Level<\/td>\n | How to reduce<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| The user did not understand the coin compression<\/td>\n | 2<\/td>\n | 4<\/td>\n | 8<\/td>\n | Simple examples: it was 1000 DEL, it became 1 DEL, the value did not change<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| Erroneous orders at the pre-rebase price<\/td>\n | 2<\/td>\n | 5<\/td>\n | 10<\/td>\n | Halt trading, cancel orders placed before the rebase, label the post-rebase price<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| Insufficient psychological effect<\/td>\n | 3<\/td>\n | 3<\/td>\n | 9<\/td>\n | Explain that the goal is balance, not maximum expensiveness<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| Technical errors in wallets<\/td>\n | 2<\/td>\n | 5<\/td>\n | 10<\/td>\n | Test network, audit, rounding control<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| Errors in user tokens<\/td>\n | 2<\/td>\n | 4<\/td>\n | 8<\/td>\n | A single automatic update of reserves and parameters<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| Reputational criticism<\/td>\n | 2<\/td>\n | 4<\/td>\n | 8<\/td>\n | Emphasize neutrality and do not promise a price increase<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\nRisk matrix for the 10000:1 option<\/h3>\n\n\n\n| Risk<\/td>\n | Probability<\/td>\n | Impact<\/td>\n | Level<\/td>\n | How to reduce<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| The user perceives the price as too high<\/td>\n | 4<\/td>\n | 4<\/td>\n | 16<\/td>\n | Explain buying fractions, but the risk remains<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| Reputational criticism about «expensive packaging»<\/td>\n | 4<\/td>\n | 4<\/td>\n | 16<\/td>\n | Publicly show the formulas and the absence of a change in capitalization<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| Fractional balances and small remainders<\/td>\n | 4<\/td>\n | 3<\/td>\n | 12<\/td>\n | Improve the display of fractions in wallets<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| Erroneous orders at the pre-rebase price<\/td>\n | 2<\/td>\n | 5<\/td>\n | 10<\/td>\n | Halt trading, cancel orders placed before the rebase<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| Difficulty compressing user tokens<\/td>\n | 3<\/td>\n | 4<\/td>\n | 12<\/td>\n | Check all types of tokens and reserves<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| Reduced sense of accessibility for newcomers<\/td>\n | 4<\/td>\n | 4<\/td>\n | 16<\/td>\n | Educational campaign, but the risk cannot be fully removed<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n The comparison of risks shows: the 10000:1 option reduces emission more strongly and at the same time changes the psychological frame more strongly. The higher the calculated price after the rebase, the more it is necessary to explain to the user why they did not become richer and why 0.1 DEL after the rebase is a normal balance.<\/p>\n The technical measures for reducing risks are the same for both options: testing, a snapshot of balances, a trading pause, cancellation of orders placed before the rebase, synchronization of exchanges and wallets, updating reference materials, a dedicated support line, and clear labeling of balances and prices «before the rebase» \/ «after the rebase» during the transition period.<\/p>\n Interim conclusion: both options require careful implementation. But the set of risks for 1000:1 is lower and easier to manage. With 10000:1, there is a higher risk that the market will see not a technical simplification but an artificial enlargement of the price.<\/p>\n Long-term modeling<\/h2>\nTo assess sustainability, it is important to understand how both options will look in several years under various network development scenarios.<\/p>\n The model is not a price forecast. It shows how DEL will look at the same market value of the network.<\/p>\n \n\n\n| Horizon<\/td>\n | Market value<\/td>\n | Price at 1000:1<\/td>\n | Price at 10000:1<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| 1 year<\/td>\n | 1.8\u20135.2 billion RUB<\/td>\n | 70\u2013200 RUB<\/td>\n | 700\u20132000 RUB<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| 3 years<\/td>\n | 2.6\u201313 billion RUB<\/td>\n | 100\u2013500 RUB<\/td>\n | 1000\u20135000 RUB<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| 5 years<\/td>\n | 5.2\u201326 billion RUB<\/td>\n | 200\u20131000 RUB<\/td>\n | 2000\u201310000 RUB<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| 10 years<\/td>\n | 7.8\u201378 billion RUB<\/td>\n | 300\u20133000 RUB<\/td>\n | 3000\u201330000 RUB<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n The data obtained shows an important pattern. Under the 1000:1 scenario, the coin remains in a comfortable range even with significant network growth. Under the 10000:1 scenario, DEL almost immediately ends up in a high price category and, with further development, quickly moves into the range of several thousand rubles per coin. For professional investors this is not a problem.<\/p>\n For the mass market, such positioning may reduce the sense of the asset’s accessibility. It is also important to consider the likelihood of a repeat rebase. After the 1000:1 option: the maximum emission will be about 92 million DEL; circulation will be about 26 million DEL. Even with significant market changes, these values remain comfortable and do not require additional reduction. Consequently, the 1000:1 option already provides a sufficient margin of sustainability over the long term.<\/p>\n Quantitative assessment of the options<\/h2>\nA scoring model was used for the final comparison. Each criterion received a weight depending on its significance for the network’s development.<\/p>\n \n\n\n| Criterion<\/td>\n | Weight<\/td>\n | 1000:1 score<\/td>\n | 1000:1 points<\/td>\n | 10000:1 score<\/td>\n | 10000:1 points<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| Preservation of economic value<\/td>\n | 10<\/td>\n | 10<\/td>\n | 10.0<\/td>\n | 10<\/td>\n | 10.0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| Ease of explanation to an ordinary user<\/td>\n | 12<\/td>\n | 9<\/td>\n | 10.8<\/td>\n | 7<\/td>\n | 8.4<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| Price psychology<\/td>\n | 14<\/td>\n | 9<\/td>\n | 12.6<\/td>\n | 6<\/td>\n | 8.4<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| Image of scarcity<\/td>\n | 12<\/td>\n | 8<\/td>\n | 9.6<\/td>\n | 10<\/td>\n | 12.0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| Liquidity and trading perception<\/td>\n | 12<\/td>\n | 8<\/td>\n | 9.6<\/td>\n | 7<\/td>\n | 8.4<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| Convenience for exchanges and trade support<\/td>\n | 10<\/td>\n | 8<\/td>\n | 8.0<\/td>\n | 7<\/td>\n | 7.0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| Technical and interface simplicity<\/td>\n | 10<\/td>\n | 8<\/td>\n | 8.0<\/td>\n | 6<\/td>\n | 6.0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| Reputational safety<\/td>\n | 10<\/td>\n | 8<\/td>\n | 8.0<\/td>\n | 6<\/td>\n | 6.0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| Long-term scale margin<\/td>\n | 10<\/td>\n | 8<\/td>\n | 8.0<\/td>\n | 9<\/td>\n | 9.0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| Total<\/td>\n | 100<\/td>\n | <\/td>\n | 84.6<\/td>\n | <\/td>\n | 75.2<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n The 10000:1 option wins on only two fronts: a more pronounced scarcity and a larger scale margin for the future. On all other criteria, the advantage remains with the 1000:1 option.<\/p>\n The difference is especially noticeable in areas that directly affect audience growth: convenience for new users; price perception; ease of explanation; reduction of reputational risks. Therefore, the final assessment confirms the conclusions of the previous sections.<\/p>\n Final conclusion<\/h3>\nThe 1000:1 rebase should be considered the base and recommended scenario.<\/strong><\/p>\nThe 10000:1 rebase may remain an alternative option for discussion; however, its advantages in scarcity do not offset the additional risks to perception, accessibility, and the long-term development of the network.<\/strong><\/p>\nFrequently asked questions<\/h2>\n\n\n\n| Question<\/td>\n | Short answer<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| Will a user become richer after the rebase?<\/td>\n | No. If the rebase is performed correctly, the value of the balance does not change. Only the number of DEL and the calculated price of one DEL change.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| Why then will the price of one DEL become higher?<\/td>\n | Because after the rebase a DEL unit becomes larger in terms of the unit of account. At 1000:1, every 1000 DEL is compressed into 1 DEL after the rebase.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| Why is 1000:1 recommended rather than 10000:1?<\/td>\n | Because 1000:1 already removes the billions and the excess zeros, yet keeps the price more accessible for ordinary users.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| What will happen to fees?<\/td>\n | Fees must be updated so that their economic cost to the user does not rise because of the change of scale.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| What will happen to staking?<\/td>\n | The shares of validators and delegators must be preserved proportionally. A participant’s economic share in the network must not change.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| Does the user need to do anything manually?<\/td>\n | No. A correct implementation must be automatic. The user should be warned in advance not to send coins to third parties and not to trust fraudulent instructions.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| What will happen to orders placed before the rebase on exchanges?<\/td>\n | Before launching the rebase, orders placed before the rebase must be canceled or safely processed by exchanges so that no one sells DEL after the rebase at the pre-rebase price.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n| Will the rebase affect the future price?<\/td>\n | The rebase itself does not guarantee growth. The future price depends on demand, network development, trust, liquidity, and the overall market.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Executive summary Over time, the economy of any network adapts to new conditions: the market changes, as do user behavior and the requirements for working conveniently with an asset. Decimal has reached a stage where the scale of DEL creates more perception difficulties than advantages. A rebase is being discussed not in order to artificially … \u0427\u0438\u0442\u0430\u0442\u044c \u0434\u0430\u043b\u0435\u0435<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":5748,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"inline_featured_image":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[2049,4776,1211,6082],"tags":[6094,6104,6108,6092,6106,6098,6102,6100,6096],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\nDEL Rebase: 1000:1 vs 10000:1 Options \u2014 Decimal<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"An economic study of the DEL rebase in the Decimal network: comparing the 1000:1 and 10000:1 options \u2014 impact on price, balances, exchanges, and risks. Asset value is preserved.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/decimalchain.com\/blog\/del-rebase-research-en\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"ru_RU\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"DEL Rebase: 1000:1 vs 10000:1 Options \u2014 Decimal\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"An economic study of the DEL rebase in the Decimal network: comparing the 1000:1 and 10000:1 options \u2014 impact on price, balances, exchanges, and risks. Asset value is preserved.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/decimalchain.com\/blog\/del-rebase-research-en\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Decimal\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2026-06-28T11:18:39+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2026-06-28T11:21:26+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/decimalchain.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/1080x1920_eng_P2P-\u0418\u041b\u0418-\u0411\u0418\u0420\u0416\u0410_-1-1024x576.png\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1024\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"576\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"\u041f\u0440\u0438\u043c\u0435\u0440\u043d\u043e\u0435 \u0432\u0440\u0435\u043c\u044f \u0434\u043b\u044f \u0447\u0442\u0435\u043d\u0438\u044f\">\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"15 \u043c\u0438\u043d\u0443\u0442\">\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/decimalchain.com\/blog\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Decimal\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/decimalchain.com\/blog\/\",\"sameAs\":[],\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/decimalchain.com\/blog\/#logo\",\"inLanguage\":\"ru-RU\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/decimalchain.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/decimal_mark_m_white.png\",\"width\":96,\"height\":96,\"caption\":\"Decimal\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/decimalchain.com\/blog\/#logo\"}},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/decimalchain.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/decimalchain.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"Decimal\",\"description\":\"\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/decimalchain.com\/blog\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":\"https:\/\/decimalchain.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\",\"query-input\":\"required name=search_term_string\"}],\"inLanguage\":\"ru-RU\"},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/decimalchain.com\/blog\/del-rebase-research-en\/#primaryimage\",\"inLanguage\":\"ru-RU\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/decimalchain.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/1080x1920_eng_P2P-\\u0418\\u041b\\u0418-\\u0411\\u0418\\u0420\\u0416\\u0410_-1.png\",\"width\":1920,\"height\":1080,\"caption\":\"An economic study of the DEL rebase in the Decimal network: comparing the 1000:1 and 10000:1 options \\u2014 impact on price, balances, exchanges, and risks. Asset value is preserved.\"},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/decimalchain.com\/blog\/del-rebase-research-en\/#webpage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/decimalchain.com\/blog\/del-rebase-research-en\/\",\"name\":\"DEL Rebase: 1000:1 vs 10000:1 Options \\u2014 Decimal\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/decimalchain.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/decimalchain.com\/blog\/del-rebase-research-en\/#primaryimage\"},\"datePublished\":\"2026-06-28T11:18:39+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-06-28T11:21:26+00:00\",\"description\":\"An economic study of the DEL rebase in the Decimal network: comparing the 1000:1 and 10000:1 options \\u2014 impact on price, balances, exchanges, and risks. Asset value is preserved.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/decimalchain.com\/blog\/del-rebase-research-en\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"ru-RU\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/decimalchain.com\/blog\/del-rebase-research-en\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/decimalchain.com\/blog\/del-rebase-research-en\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"item\":{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/decimalchain.com\/blog\/ru\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/decimalchain.com\/blog\/ru\/\",\"name\":\"Home\"}},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"item\":{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/decimalchain.com\/blog\/del-rebase-research-en\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/decimalchain.com\/blog\/del-rebase-research-en\/\",\"name\":\"Economic Study of DEL Rebase Options in the Decimal Network\"}}]},{\"@type\":[\"Article\",\"NewsArticle\"],\"@id\":\"https:\/\/decimalchain.com\/blog\/del-rebase-research-en\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/decimalchain.com\/blog\/del-rebase-research-en\/#webpage\"},\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/decimalchain.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/e17bcb21de2c9e16f1f32f2ae1af46fd\"},\"headline\":\"Economic Study of DEL Rebase Options in the Decimal Network\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-06-28T11:18:39+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-06-28T11:21:26+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/decimalchain.com\/blog\/del-rebase-research-en\/#webpage\"},\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/decimalchain.com\/blog\/#organization\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/decimalchain.com\/blog\/del-rebase-research-en\/#primaryimage\"},\"keywords\":\"crypto rebase,DEL coin scale,DEL price after rebase,DEL rebase,DEL supply change,one-time rebase,reverse token split,token elastic supply,what is a rebase\",\"articleSection\":\"Decimal,Decimal blockchain,DEL,elastic supply\",\"inLanguage\":\"ru-RU\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/decimalchain.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/e17bcb21de2c9e16f1f32f2ae1af46fd\",\"name\":\"Decimal\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/decimalchain.com\/blog\/#personlogo\",\"inLanguage\":\"ru-RU\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/bd773d9e60ca4a02c207df26c95706f8?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Decimal\"}}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/decimalchain.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5747"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/decimalchain.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/decimalchain.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/decimalchain.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/decimalchain.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=5747"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/decimalchain.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5747\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":5750,"href":"https:\/\/decimalchain.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5747\/revisions\/5750"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/decimalchain.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/5748"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/decimalchain.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5747"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/decimalchain.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5747"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/decimalchain.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5747"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}} | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |