Finally, a project party has risen up! Zerebro's co-founder has revealed some grievances and entanglements between exchanges and market makers regarding listing coins: Binance wants $1 million in cash, Kraken wants $100,000 to $200,000 plus tokens, Bybit wants $250,000 plus tokens, and Wintermute directly demands 10% of the supply.
These numbers are unusual; to me, they feel like a heavy bomb dropped into the crypto industry, brutally tearing apart the truth behind the so-called "listing is the peak" in the crypto circle.
Of course, Zerebro itself is not a pure project either. Jeffy had a "fake death" drama, and to be honest, I, as a retail investor, have also been cut for 20,000 USDT with $ZEREBRO.
However, I still feel that he should be supported for speaking out this time:
Because he has torn apart the long-standing "unspoken" understanding between VC project parties, exchanges, and market makers.
Why has it erupted now? Everyone is clear about the rules for listing coins on exchanges and some market maker operation tricks; they have merely evolved in various "forms." Why is it happening precisely now?
Because the black swan event on October 11 can be regarded as a "subprime crisis" in the crypto circle dominated by exchanges, and the once-zero coin prices have revealed a harsh reality: the liquidity of many altcoins has long dried up.
So, essentially, this is the critical point marking the death of the VC coin era and the massive collapse of some altcoin projects.
Moreover, this time the exchanges have played themselves into a corner, experiencing an emotional backlash after their peak, giving many VC coin project parties the opportunity to rise up and shout.
In fact, it’s not surprising. When VC coins are listed with valuations in the tens of billions but lack corresponding liquidity and user support, every link in the profit chain—project parties, exchanges, and market makers—are squeezing each other.
Exchanges want to maintain the proud image of the "chosen ones," market makers want to gain excess profits, and VCs want to exit and cash out, ultimately transferring all costs to retail investors.
As the intermediary, project parties have to bear the pressure from VCs (high valuations, rapid listings), pay exorbitant fees to exchanges and market makers, and face skepticism from retail investors and plummeting coin prices after listing.
Under this multi-party contradiction, someone finally couldn't take it anymore.
So, what is the deeper issue?
It's actually quite simple; it's not just about whether the listing fees are expensive. If the market were healthy, VC coins could afford it, and it’s not purely the high FDV that has hurt retail investors' hearts. Retail investors have been seeking survival amidst massive "token dumping" for several cycles.
The key issue is the failure of the entire industry's pricing mechanism and value discovery function.
When listing coins no longer considers project quality, user demand, or technological innovation, but rather "how much money to give" and "how many tokens to lock," the entire market becomes a pure game of capital.
Moreover, exchanges are no longer content with "carefully selecting projects" but are instead building their own platforms and mass-producing projects. Well, the exchanges' inner thoughts might be, since VC coins are using exchanges as exit channels, why not just flip the table and stop playing with VC coins?
I think this is the truth behind the explosion of contradictions between exchanges and VC coins.
The pessimistic view is that I don't think this revelation will change anything. Because in the eyes of many, it’s just a sad drama of dogs biting dogs, and there won't be any immediate changes.
But, but, but! At least it has broken the silence, and I believe more and more righteous project parties will realize that they might be able to stand up and shout against this "dirty game" and the "twisted rules of power"!
免责声明:本文章仅代表作者个人观点,不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享,不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议,与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权,请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com,本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。