By Ismay, BlockBeats
On October 5, Andrew Kang, co-founder and partner of crypto venture capital firm Mechanism Capital, posted on social media, "It looks like @MustStopMurad's speech at Token2049 has catalyzed the next wave of capital reallocation into Meme coins." The comment section of this tweet sparked a lot of discussion, and on-chain detective ZachXBT and trading KOL Ansem also sparked a debate because of this remark.
The focus of the dispute is on their views on their respective roles and behaviors. ZachXBT accused Ansem of frequently promoting small-cap currencies through his huge fan base, causing many people to lose money due to blindly following the trend, and even called it "cutting leeks". Ansem countered that he was only choosing the best transactions in the market, and said that as a trader, he could not ensure that every transaction was successful, but he helped more people than he hurt.
ZachXBT claims to have made substantial contributions to the crypto community by solving hacker problems, helping to arrest criminals, and recovering victims' funds, helping people avoid KOL "traps" like Ansem. Ansem believes that ZachXBT's accusations of its behavior are exaggerated, and that the claim of promoting hundreds of coins is not true. "We can talk about meme coins all day, but you also know that the people I have helped on this platform far outweigh the people I have hurt, and this topic ends here."
The debate ended with Ansem saying, “If I could hit 100% accurately, I would have been the god of the earth. It is pointless to criticize me for some of the coins I mentioned falling, especially when the entire altcoin market is falling.”
The following content comes from the analysis of Ansem’s tweets by crypto KOL @dethective, combined with the price trend of the meme coins he called, to prove whether Ansem really dumped meme coins to his fans. BlockBeats has also previously analyzed and summarized Ansem’s transaction addresses.
Many witnessed a fascinating debate between @zachxbt and @blknoiz06. This raised a key question: Is Ansem really dumping small-cap tokens to his followers? I analyzed over 40,000 tweets to uncover the truth.
Ansem's average return
If you bought each token when it was first mentioned, your average return would be about 150%. The best performing tokens are:
$WIF: +5,300%
$BONK: +1,243%
$MOTHER: +867%
Sounds amazing, right? Not really.
When we look at the median return, it drops to -55%.
The reason for this discrepancy is that 33 of the 45 tokens had negative returns, with more than half falling by 50% or more.
Every token that Ansem actually supports shows a 100% positive return, an analysis that is consistent with @MustStopMurad’s popular opinion: When Ansem has faith in a project and supports it for the long term, it tends to have a net positive impact on the industry. The correlation between the number of tweets and project performance is also very clear.
This is more than just boasting: this is about belief. On the other hand, the tokens that Ansem only mentioned 1-2 times all had 100% negative returns. Classic pump and dump behavior.
Methodology
More than 40,000 tweets were captured.
Write code to identify token promotion by detecting the relevant characters after the '$' symbol.
Record the date each token was first mentioned.
Capture its price action.
My personal opinion
I originally conducted this analysis in order to support Zach in the debate. However, I strive to remain objective and therefore hope to be able to fairly evaluate Ansem's arguments.
The key question is: “Is it unethical to promote a project with a low market cap to a large number of followers?”
My conclusion is: the key is not the market cap, but the long-term commitment. It is unethical to abandon a project after just one tweet. But if you really support it for the long term, it is understandable.
