To be honest, I am optimistic about the potential of this token, but I still don't have the courage to invest real money. The problem isn't with the token itself, but with the underlying holding structure—too many chips are held by the development team. The moment you buy in, they could liquidate at any time, causing the price to plummet. Rather than saying this is market manipulation, it's more like gambling on the developers' conscience.
This highly concentrated holding pattern is essentially no different from "one coin, one devaluation," it's just a matter of time. As retail investors, we are always passive in how we play. Instead of constantly digging into high-risk projects, it's better to look at the distribution of holdings, find tokens with relatively dispersed chips, and trade with peace of mind. There are many pitfalls with new coins; observing more and impulsing less is the right approach.
View Original
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.
21 Likes
Reward
21
6
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
MainnetDelayedAgain
· 2025-12-17 08:36
According to the database, this wave of position concentration has already broken records, and 87 days have passed since the last promised unlock date.
As for betting on conscience, I suggest it be listed in the Guinness World Records; it will eventually be realized.
Let's just wait quietly—it's the art of time.
View OriginalReply0
GasGasGasBro
· 2025-12-16 02:50
When it comes to team holding chips... really, just by looking at the distribution of holdings, you can tell whether to get involved or not.
View OriginalReply0
FortuneTeller42
· 2025-12-16 02:42
The phrase "betting developers' conscience" really hits home; there are too many cases of huge losses.
As soon as the team's chips are concentrated, I just pass directly—there's nothing more to say.
Honestly, it's still the same old story: retail investors are always the ones taking the fall. Wake up, everyone.
View OriginalReply0
StableCoinKaren
· 2025-12-16 02:41
The team holds a bunch, and we retail investors are just the little guys.
View OriginalReply0
just_here_for_vibes
· 2025-12-16 02:38
The development team holds so much in their hands; frankly, they just haven't run away yet.
Stop messing around, look carefully at the holdings before talking.
This kind of market manipulation is too obvious; I really dare not touch it.
Whenever the concentration of chips is too high, I just pass—lesson learned the hard way.
Rather than chasing new coins, it's better to carefully review the holdings list; that's the way to survive.
If the team holds a lot of chips, you should take a detour—there's nothing much to say.
Bet on the developer's conscience? I laugh. It's more prudent to look at on-chain data.
These types of projects are just for big players to cut leeks; what are we retail investors even doing?
View OriginalReply0
FlatTax
· 2025-12-16 02:34
Having too much concentration in team holdings is indeed a minefield; basically, it's a gamble on luck, and I've also become hesitant.
To be honest, I am optimistic about the potential of this token, but I still don't have the courage to invest real money. The problem isn't with the token itself, but with the underlying holding structure—too many chips are held by the development team. The moment you buy in, they could liquidate at any time, causing the price to plummet. Rather than saying this is market manipulation, it's more like gambling on the developers' conscience.
This highly concentrated holding pattern is essentially no different from "one coin, one devaluation," it's just a matter of time. As retail investors, we are always passive in how we play. Instead of constantly digging into high-risk projects, it's better to look at the distribution of holdings, find tokens with relatively dispersed chips, and trade with peace of mind. There are many pitfalls with new coins; observing more and impulsing less is the right approach.