•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Venice Token (VVV) has continued to draw strong investor capital in recent weeks, particularly as Venice AI expands its product through real-world partnerships. The rally, however, has also reignited debate over the project’s tokenomics, with critics questioning the long-term implications of its dual-token structure.
Trading activity suggests aligned demand across both spot and perpetual markets for VVV. The token has gained roughly 13% over the past day and traded around $13 at press time, after shifting from selling pressure to net buying activity in recent days.
Between May 5 and May 6, investors sold approximately $4.38 million worth of VVV. The trend then reversed, with buyers accumulating roughly $372,000 worth of the asset, signaling renewed market confidence.
In the perpetual market, capital inflows increased alongside a positive funding rate. CoinGlass data cited in the article showed nearly $21 million in fresh capital entering VVV’s leveraged market, while the Weighted Funding Rate rose to approximately 0.0170% during early trading hours.
Market scrutiny has centered on Venice AI’s dual-token approach, particularly DIEM, a separate token used to pay for AI compute credits. Critics argue the design offers limited direct value capture for VVV and could create long-term sell pressure if operational costs rise.
Using DIEM to access compute injects zero new cash into the company unlike pro subscriptions. So if they’re ever light on cash or want to scale infra, they’ll likely have to sell VVV to cover it.
Erik Voorhees, co-founder of Venice Token, responded by describing DIEM as a deliberate mechanism intended to address pricing instability in the original VVV model. He said that when VVV launched, it enabled free access through VVV itself, but variable pricing, supply, and allocation volatility made it unsuitable for users needing consistent inference over time.
When VVV launched we first enabled VVV itself to grant the free access, but because of the variable price, supply, and inability to guarantee fixed quantities of allocation, it was too volatile to be useful for serious people needing inference over time. DIEM was drawn out of VVV to provide the stability ($1/day).
The article also notes that both VVV and DIEM operate under a mint-and-burn mechanism intended to balance issuance with demand-driven consumption.
Despite ongoing criticism, VVV has continued to rally as community sentiment improves. After trending lower since May 2, bullish sentiment rebounded sharply.
At press time, the article states that roughly 84% of participants hold a bullish outlook on VVV, based on approximately 13,800 votes.
Some of that confidence appears linked to Venice Token’s expansion efforts and increasing product adoption. The article cites a recent partnership announcement from Strike Robot, which said it will use VVV to power its humanoid robots with private and uncensored AI systems for vision processing and decision-making.
Premium gym chains are entering a “golden era” that is ending or already in decline, as rising operating costs collide with shifting consumer preferences toward more flexible, community-based ways to exercise. Long-term memberships are shrinking, margins are pressured by higher rents and facility expenses, and competition from smaller, more personalized…
