There is a longstanding problem in the crypto world, especially glaring in the MEME coin sector—projects are everywhere, but only a few can survive and trade.
Recently, a leading token issuance platform revealed data: 98.6% of token projects ultimately end up "rugging." On the surface, the issuance volume seems large, but this incentive model is actually inverted—it charges based on market cap tiers, which ends up benefiting low-risk, low-quality project teams, while high-risk players who truly contribute liquidity and trading volume are neglected.
Co-founder Alon Cohen recently spoke frankly: traders are the lifeblood of the platform. If the incentive mechanism deviates from them, the ecosystem is doomed.
**Reforming this issue is not an overnight task; it will be done in two steps.**
The first step has already been launched—multi-wallet fee sharing. Simply put, it allows distributing transaction fees to up to 10 wallets, and also supports transferring token ownership and revoking update permissions. It sounds highly technical, but it’s actually solving an old pain point: lack of transparency in project team allocations. This builds trust, and fees can be claimed anytime and never expire, so creators won’t rush to cash out, but instead have motivation for long-term development.
The second step is the killer move—market-driven fee determination mechanism. This is the real overhaul of the system. In simple terms, it lets traders vote on which tokens’ narratives deserve creator fee support. This completely reverses the incentive direction, shifting from "creators first" to "market first," allowing the market to filter high-quality projects itself.
**Initial results of the reform are promising.**
Once the news broke, the platform’s native token $PUMP surged over 10%. Recently, trading activity has also been strong, hitting a record daily trading volume of $2.03 billion on January 6. But we must also acknowledge the pressure behind the scenes—the $500 million lawsuit and the harsh reality that 98.6% of tokens ultimately become rug projects cannot be ignored. This underscores how urgent the reform really is.
Ultimately, this reform aims to solve the old problems in the MEME coin ecosystem: piling up quantity is useless, quality is key. Previously, the platform earned from token issuance fees; now, it aims to truly build a market and generate liquidity. This is a shift from "mass-producing token factories" to "cultivating active trading markets." Whether it succeeds will directly impact the future ecosystem of projects like $PUMP, $DOGE, and $SHIB, and it’s worth watching closely.
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.
14 Likes
Reward
14
6
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
Liquidated_Larry
· 2h ago
98.6% exit scam rate, how desperate is that? No wonder the platform needs to undergo a harsh reform.
---
Market voting decides fee distribution? That move is indeed ruthless, at least it's not the project team calling the shots anymore.
---
$PUMP rising 10%—is it a sign of confidence in the reform or just following the trend? I'm a bit confused.
---
Distributing fees across multiple wallets sounds good, but the key is having traders. Without liquidity, transparency is meaningless.
---
Shifting from a token issuance factory to a trading market—easy to say, hard to do. Does the crypto community have enough trust for this?
---
The $500 million lawsuit is still looming and the market is still going crazy.
---
The question is, will traders really vote for tokens with a narrative, or is it just follow-the-trend trading?
---
Creators can withdraw their fees anytime, never expiring. That definitely makes people less eager to cash out immediately.
---
The saying "quality over quantity" is heard every year, but we still see tokens with poor quality failing to survive.
---
Want to earn fees from the platform instead of building a market? Sounds like a forced compromise.
View OriginalReply0
BlockchainRetirementHome
· 2h ago
98.6%跑路,这数据得多离谱啊,感觉买啥都能中奖
Honestly, traders are the real parents; this time, they finally remembered.
PUMP up 10% just like that, and the lawsuit is still hanging, how to digest this?
Market voting filters projects; it sounds good but still depends on execution.
Making money from fees instead of liquidity; this business model needs to turn around.
The few who survive should have long become models.
Can the shared fee model really improve transparency?
Let's wait and see; in the end, it's all about who truly commits to building the ecosystem.
View OriginalReply0
FreeRider
· 2h ago
98.6% exit scam... This number is truly astonishing, it feels like the platform has finally faced reality.
Trader voting to decide fees? Now that's more reasonable, can't just let trash project teams freeload.
A 10% increase isn't surprising; the key is whether they can survive this wave of lawsuits.
To put it simply, quality is king. The previous token factory model should have been phased out long ago.
Can $PUMP withstand the pressure? This reform is the real test.
View OriginalReply0
BTCWaveRider
· 2h ago
98.6% exit rate, how outrageous does it have to be to create this miracle, haha
Wait, will the market voting mechanism turn into the Matthew effect again?
$PUMP rises 10% and everyone cheers, but what about the 500 million lawsuit, how do you calculate that?
It's politely called "cultivating the market," but really it depends on who has more traffic.
Without genuine project quality screening, no matter how many reforms there are, it's just a re-skin.
View OriginalReply0
liquidation_watcher
· 2h ago
98.6% exit rate is really incredible, the platform finally remembers the traders, huh
View OriginalReply0
LiquidatedAgain
· 2h ago
98.6%跑路... I’m damn well that remaining 1.4%, and then I got liquidated. Can’t even smile.
Starting to talk about incentive mechanisms again. When I heard this last time, I was still adding to my position.
Market voting? Sounds good, but I’m just worried that the voters are some water-headed retail investors. I am one myself.
$PUMP went up 10%, I didn’t catch it. Now talking about reforms, it feels a bit like a last-minute dinner.
This lawsuit with five hundred million hanging over our heads. No matter how good the narrative, it can’t withstand the force of legal liquidation.
There is a longstanding problem in the crypto world, especially glaring in the MEME coin sector—projects are everywhere, but only a few can survive and trade.
Recently, a leading token issuance platform revealed data: 98.6% of token projects ultimately end up "rugging." On the surface, the issuance volume seems large, but this incentive model is actually inverted—it charges based on market cap tiers, which ends up benefiting low-risk, low-quality project teams, while high-risk players who truly contribute liquidity and trading volume are neglected.
Co-founder Alon Cohen recently spoke frankly: traders are the lifeblood of the platform. If the incentive mechanism deviates from them, the ecosystem is doomed.
**Reforming this issue is not an overnight task; it will be done in two steps.**
The first step has already been launched—multi-wallet fee sharing. Simply put, it allows distributing transaction fees to up to 10 wallets, and also supports transferring token ownership and revoking update permissions. It sounds highly technical, but it’s actually solving an old pain point: lack of transparency in project team allocations. This builds trust, and fees can be claimed anytime and never expire, so creators won’t rush to cash out, but instead have motivation for long-term development.
The second step is the killer move—market-driven fee determination mechanism. This is the real overhaul of the system. In simple terms, it lets traders vote on which tokens’ narratives deserve creator fee support. This completely reverses the incentive direction, shifting from "creators first" to "market first," allowing the market to filter high-quality projects itself.
**Initial results of the reform are promising.**
Once the news broke, the platform’s native token $PUMP surged over 10%. Recently, trading activity has also been strong, hitting a record daily trading volume of $2.03 billion on January 6. But we must also acknowledge the pressure behind the scenes—the $500 million lawsuit and the harsh reality that 98.6% of tokens ultimately become rug projects cannot be ignored. This underscores how urgent the reform really is.
Ultimately, this reform aims to solve the old problems in the MEME coin ecosystem: piling up quantity is useless, quality is key. Previously, the platform earned from token issuance fees; now, it aims to truly build a market and generate liquidity. This is a shift from "mass-producing token factories" to "cultivating active trading markets." Whether it succeeds will directly impact the future ecosystem of projects like $PUMP, $DOGE, and $SHIB, and it’s worth watching closely.