WhitePaper EN
  • WhitePaper DeflationCoin
  • 1. Introduction
  • 1.0. Preface
  • 1.1. The Socio-Economic Consequences of Inflation
  • 1.2. The process of exporting inflation from the U.S. to other countries
  • 1.3. A Global Bankrupt Disguised as a "Financial Leader"
  • 1.4. The Birth of the Crypto Industry
  • 1.5. Bitcoin’s Limitations
  • 1.6. A Cryptocurrency Without the Flaws of "Digital Gold"
  • 2. Mission and Objectives
    • 2.0. Mission and Objectives
  • 3. Operating and design principles
    • 3.0. Preface
    • 3.1. Limited Supply with Zero Inflation
    • 3.2. Daily Smart-Burning of Coins
    • 3.3. Deflationary Halving—Unlike Bitcoin.
    • 3.4. Smart-Staking
    • 3.5. Smart Dividends
    • 3.6. Gradual Unlocking
    • 3.7. Basket and Pump (BaP)
    • 3.8. Attention Capture Mechanism
    • 3.9. Blockchain-Integrated Affiliate Marketing
  • 3.10. Smart Fees
  • 3.11. Deflationary Ecosystem
  • 3.11.1. Educational Gambling
  • 3.11.2. Potential Directions for Scaling the Ecosystem
  • 3.11.3. Legal and Regulatory Aspects of the Ecosystem
  • 3.12. Environmental Principle
  • 3.13. Geometric Progression in Coin Distribution
  • 3.14. Automated Diversification Across Exchanges
  • 3.15. Online Node
  • 3.16. Open Source Blockchain and Financial Transparency of the Ecosystem
  • 3.17. Three-Level Decision-Making Mechanism: "Proof-of-Deflation"
  • 3.17.1. Meritocracy of Ideas
  • 3.17.2. Skin in the game
  • 3.17.3. The Right to Veto
  • 3.18. The principle of “Humor and Memes”
  • 4. Team
    • 4.0. Preface
    • 4.1. Natoshi Sakamoto
  • 4.2. Vitalik But Not-Buterin
  • 4.3. DeflationCoin Mafia
  • 5. Tokenomics
    • 5.0. Preface
  • 5.1. Token Distribution
  • 5.2. The 50% | 50% Expenditure Principle
  • 6. Blockchain architecture level
    • Minus 1 level (-L1)
  • 7. Technical Architecture
    • 7.0. Technical Architecture
    • 7.1. Reliability and Security Architecture
    • 7.2. Cryptographic Security Methods
    • 7.3. Conceptual Architecture of DeflationCoin
    • 7.3.1. Smart Contract Architecture
  • 7.3.2. Online Node
  • 7.3.3. Deflationary Ecosystem
  • 7.3.4. Automated Order Placement on DEX
  • 7.4. Development and Transition to a Proprietary Innovative Blockchain.
  • 8. asset rating
    • 8.0. Asset Rating
  • 8.1. Detailed analysis of indicators
  • 9. Conclusion
    • 9. Conclusion
  • 10. Reference
    • 10. Reference
  • 11. Contact Information
    • 11. Contact Information
Powered by GitBook
On this page

3.17.3. The Right to Veto

In 1985, Apple’s founder Steve Jobs was forced to leave the company due to conflicts with its management. After his departure, Apple faced significant challenges such as financial losses, unsuccessful product launches, and declining market share. It wasn’t until Jobs returned in 1997 that Apple began to recover. He streamlined the product line, focused on innovation, and launched iconic products like the iMac, iPod, iPhone, and iPad, which restored Apple as an industry leader and set it on a path of sustainable growth.

Similar situations have occurred in other companies after their founders left:

  • Starbucks: After Howard Schultz stepped down, the company rapidly expanded but lost focus on quality. This led to declining sales and a crisis, which Schultz resolved upon his return by implementing necessary reforms.

  • Dell: Following Michael Dell’s resignation, the company lost market position and faced fierce competition. Dell’s return and reorganization restored the company’s profitability.

  • Yahoo: After Jerry Yang left, Yahoo lost its market leadership and couldn’t compete with Google. This ultimately led to its acquisition by Verizon and the loss of its independence.

  • Uber: The departure of founder Travis Kalanick triggered a corporate culture crisis and the loss of an aggressive growth strategy. While new CEO Dara Khosrowshahi stabilized the company, Uber no longer exhibits the same growth dynamics.

These examples highlight that founders often play a unique role that extends beyond traditional leadership. Their vision, innovation, and deep understanding of company culture can be critical to business success. When founders leave, especially during critical stages, companies may lose focus, their spirit of innovation, and organizational culture, leading to management difficulties and reduced competitiveness.

The right to veto enables a founder to protect their vision and the project’s values from the pressures of external investors and market forces. This mechanism ensures the preservation of a long-term strategy centered on innovation while preventing short-term changes that could undermine the company’s uniqueness and culture. This is particularly important for technology and innovation-driven companies, where strategies often prioritize long-term growth and the maintenance of brand identity.

Previous3.17.2. Skin in the gameNext3.18. The principle of “Humor and Memes”

Last updated 5 hours ago