2026-01-17 06:21:21

The catch-22 of certain token launches really exposes the game dynamics here.

Buy at 30k? Bundle holders will dump on you without hesitation. Early entry turns into a holding problem real fast.

Wait for 100k? If the claim mechanism still hasn't triggered, that's your signal the peak is already priced in. You're essentially buying at what could be the permanent ceiling.

Here's the thing about billionaire devs—zero personal incentive to claim when they're already liquid. A $2M barrier with zero volatility doesn't move markets. These projects become trapped in their own structure.

Even if you time it perfectly after a claim event drops, unless there's genuine demand outside the token mechanics, you're still chasing a topped-out asset. The question isn't when to buy—it's whether the underlying utility actually justifies any entry point.

This is why so many tokens become zombie projects: the incentive structure is misaligned from day one. Devs have no reason to push adoption. Holders have no reason to hold. It's a standoff that favors whoever got in first.

TOKEN1,13%

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

13 Likes

Reward
13
10
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

HashRateHustler

· 4h ago

This is just a setup; early entrants get crushed, latecomers become bagholders. --- Major investors have already cashed out, so what's the point of claiming? The game rules are inherently flawed. --- NGL, projects like this deserve to die; the developers have no motivation to do anything. --- It's that old story again... whoever invests first wins, everyone else is just playing along. --- Wait, wait, wait, in the end, it still depends on whether there are real use cases. Purely stacking mechanisms, nobody's stupid. --- The entire structure is just encouraging rug pulls, no wonder zombie coins are everywhere. --- Better to avoid this kind of project; wait until truly capable projects come along.

View OriginalReply0

BlockchainDecoder

· 18h ago

According to research, this article touches on the fundamental flaw in token incentive mechanism design— from a technical architecture perspective, the threshold setting of the claim mechanism indeed presents obvious game theory issues. It is worth noting that this "first-mover advantage trap" has become a common phenomenon in the multi-chain ecosystem in 2023, with data showing that over 68% of new token projects experience liquidity stagnation within 6 months of launch. Citing the core insights from the Selfish Mining paper, when developers lack secondary incentives, the entire system will naturally evolve into a zero-sum game. Overall, the root of the problem is not the token itself, but the initial design neglects the utility value mapping for long-term holders—this is a classic principal-agent dilemma. A deeper reflection is recommended: without real business needs to support, no matter how ingenious the mechanism design is, it cannot save the situation.

View OriginalReply0

HypotheticalLiquidator

· 01-17 14:33

This is a dead loop. Enter early and get crushed, enter late and the ceiling is already set... the dev has no motivation to pump the market, and the systemic risk is right there.

View OriginalReply0

SmartContractPlumber

· 01-17 06:51

In plain terms, it's just that the permission control wasn't set up properly; developers can manipulate the distribution mechanism at will. This is the same as several projects I audited before—pitfalls were embedded during contract deployment. The incentive structure has been flawed from the very first line of code, and without formal verification, such architectural flaws cannot be fixed.

View OriginalReply0

OldLeekConfession

· 01-17 06:51

NGL, this kind of project structure is indeed a dead end. Buy early and get crushed, buy late and buy at the peak, the token issuer doesn't care about your life or death at all.

View OriginalReply0

AirdropHunter420

· 01-17 06:51

ngl, this is a dead end. Enter early and get crushed, enter late and buy the top, developers don't care at all.

View OriginalReply0

SoliditySurvivor

· 01-17 06:44

Buying in early and getting crushed, buying at the top when late, this game is damn unbelievable These project structures are completely rotten, developers have no motivation at all, and holders have no reason to hold It's a typical zero-sum game, only those in the primary market make money

View OriginalReply0

GateUser-addcaaf7

· 01-17 06:41

ngl, this is a dead end. Buying early results in being dumped on, buying late means you've already hit the top, and developers have no motivation at all.

View OriginalReply0

tx_pending_forever

· 01-17 06:39

Exactly right, it's a dead end. Buy early and get crushed, buy late and hit the ceiling. Developers have no motivation at all, and the coin becoming a zombie is only a matter of time.

View OriginalReply0

ShibaSunglasses

· 01-17 06:29

Nah, this is a dead end. Early investors get crushed, latecomers buy the dip, and the devs don't care at all.

View OriginalReply0