2026-01-20 01:23:39

This case is indeed worth caution. The project raised $11.5 million during the funding stage with a valuation of $20 million, which looks pretty good. But at TGE (Token Generation Event), the fully diluted valuation reflected only $600,000—an enormous gap that’s almost surreal. Even more heartbreaking, the price has dropped 97% since the ICO.

The core issue lies in asymmetric information flow. Project teams, investors, and community KOLs are involved in numerous undisclosed recommendations and conflicts of interest. Ordinary investors are bombarded with repeated promotions but have no idea about the actual valuation logic. The huge disparity between the funding valuation and the actual FDV fundamentally reflects the valuation bubble present in early-stage project funding.

Such cases remind us that when evaluating crypto projects, it’s not enough to look at the funding amount and valuation figures. More importantly, attention should be paid to tokenomics design, liquidity structure, and genuine market demand. Blindly following recommendations may just be taking over a bubble that’s been artificially inflated.

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.

10 Likes

Reward
10
6
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

airdrop_whisperer

· 1h ago

97% decline... This is absolutely outrageous, it's high time to recognize the true nature of these projects.

View OriginalReply0

TheMemefather

· 1h ago

97% decline? The level of absurdity is comparable to some of the local dog coins back in the day, and we should have been alert long ago. Asymmetric information is basically the standard operating procedure for big players to cut leeks. Raising 20 million in financing with a valuation, and only a 600,000 actual value at TGE, these numbers are so off they don't seem real. The cost of following the trend is becoming the last bag holder, with no other ending. Tokenomics is the real threshold; the vast majority of people simply can't understand it. There are countless such cases, each one making people lose everything and still not learning their lesson. Information asymmetry is a life-and-death line; financing data without verification channels is basically only of reference value.

View OriginalReply0

HodlTheDoor

· 1h ago

Damn, a 97% decline, how much can you cut? Another trap to harvest retail investors, raising 20 million with a valuation that ended up only 600,000, hilarious. KOLs hype it up, retail investors all jump in, this trick is played out. The difference between the fundraising valuation and FDV is so large, it's obviously a fake project. Looking at a project’s potential isn’t about the fundraising amount, you need to look at tokenomics, most people don’t bother. Following recommendations is just taking the bait, this hits home. Are there still people trusting KOLs’ recommendations? Now it’s all about利益链条. That’s why I only buy old coins, new projects are too risky. 20 million shrunk to 600,000, how high must the project team’s valuation be? Information asymmetry is the best tool for harvesting retail investors.

View OriginalReply0

CryptoCrazyGF

· 1h ago

97% decline, what a loss... --- Raising 20 million with a valuation that only reaches 600,000 at TGE? How many retail investors can this gap trap? --- It's the same old story with KOL marketing and information asymmetry. --- Ignoring tokenomics and rushing in just based on fundraising amounts? Purely courting death. --- The bubble of a 20 million valuation blown up like this—how many people got cut? --- No regulation on recommendation relationships, it's always the same mess. --- 97% drop... I wonder what those early round investment institutions are thinking. --- The point about overvalued bubbles being exploited is spot on; I am the one who said "this is so right." --- Basically, the valuation is fake, some people made money and left, retail investors take the final hit. --- FDV and fundraising valuation are so far apart? Their calculations are on point.

View OriginalReply0

GasWhisperer

· 1h ago

97% down? that's not volatility, that's a mempool of broken promises lmao

Reply0

ReverseTradingGuru

· 1h ago

This is a typical case of digital magic, from a $20 million valuation to a $600,000 FDV, which is basically just a pump and dump. It's another game of information asymmetry, with KOLs hyping wildly while retail investors foolishly buy in. A 97% decline indicates that no one truly understood this project at the start. Funding valuation is just a paper figure; what really determines life or death is the tokenomics, which most people ignore. Following the trend always results in the most expensive tuition. Projects without real demand, no matter how loud they hype, are just air coins. So, when evaluating a project, think in reverse — the larger the funding and the more aggressive the hype, the higher the risk. Whenever such cases appear, a new group of people will be educated.

View OriginalReply0