2026-01-13 12:32:43

A prominent figure launched a Solana-based token that quickly climbed to $600 million in valuation. The project was pitched with messaging around civic values and community defense.

But here's where it gets interesting—many assumed this was an official initiative, especially given the high-profile association. Trading volume surged. Retail investors piled in.

What actually transpired reveals a common pattern in crypto: brand recognition alone doesn't guarantee legitimacy. A familiar name can create powerful psychological anchoring, making speculation feel safer than it is. The token's trajectory mirrors countless pump cycles we've seen on various blockchains.

It's a textbook reminder of due diligence basics—verify official channels, check for on-chain evidence, and question the narrative when a token's marketing outpaces its fundamentals. Even in bull markets, skepticism remains essential.

SOL2%

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.

6 Likes

Reward
6
4
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

DisillusiionOracle

· 7h ago

It's the same old trick again—celebrity effect + community narrative to harvest a wave of retail investors. I'm tired of this routine; it's always the same. $600M? Wake up, everyone. Is due diligence really that hard? A well-known name does not equal a reliable project; this really needs to be ingrained in your mind. On-chain evidence is all there; it's just that no one is paying attention. Just another pump cycle, nothing new.

View OriginalReply0

GasFeeNightmare

· 7h ago

It's the same old trick... As soon as the name sounds impressive, retail investors get overwhelmed, and they don't care how gas fees are calculated and just rush in. Wait, no, even though Solana's gas fees are cheap, I still didn't dare to touch it. I watched on-chain data for half an hour late at night before realizing there was no official contract verification. $600m? I did some quick calculations. If I really go in, I also have to consider slippage... The feeling of losing and saving at the same time is back. Brand = safety? Nonsense. I've seen so many cases of rug pulls backed by celebrities. When I check the validators, they are all unfamiliar addresses. This was a hard lesson learned. Next time I see this kind of thing, I will first check the contract code for an hour before deciding. Better to miss out than rush in.

View OriginalReply0

MonkeySeeMonkeyDo

· 7h ago

It's the same old trick again, celebrity effect triggers retail investors to all jump in Just hearing the name makes you want to rush in? Check on the chain and your dreams are shattered 600 million? Feels like tomorrow it will be a story of 6 million This wave of manipulation is a textbook-level weed-cutting operation Fame ≠ safety, why is this so hard to understand? The old trick of pumping cycles, switch to a different celebrity and it's a new round I'll just watch and see who will be crying later

View OriginalReply0

AlwaysQuestioning

· 7h ago

It's the same old trick again, just a brand halo to harvest the leeks, right? Official channels haven't claimed it, yet a bunch of people are rushing... Truly unbelievable. A $600M increase is so outrageous, what do on-chain data say? A nice name doesn't equal safety, this is straight out of Crypto 101 textbooks.

View OriginalReply0