Article source: BeWater

Is the community the culprit behind the token price drop? Crypto project teams are digging their own graves.

1/ The project team's clever operations

Currently, new projects generally face a common problem: the token drops below the listing price immediately. As soon as the token is launched, there is selling pressure with no one to buy.

To avoid this situation and to have a seemingly better launch for the tokens, the project team has invented a series of 'clever operations':

  • Massive control of supply through insider trading before TGE;

  • Pre-launch airdrop staking lock-up;

  • Or directly avoid issuing airdrops through so-called witch-like methods.

2/ Community = buying pressure or selling pressure

But interestingly, the project team's behavior subconsciously equates their community with the selling pressure of the token, making community airdrop selling pressure a major culprit behind disappointing token prices.

So the question arises: why did the community that the project team worked hard to build ultimately become selling pressure instead of buying pressure?

If the community is just selling pressure, then why is the project team still investing so much energy into building the community?

3/ Assembly line community factory

In fact, many project teams do not understand the community and have not figured out why they should build a community. Many times, the project team's starting point is simply to submit a report to the exchange, as it is a condition for listing on the exchange, a bargaining chip for better exchanges.

Thus, the 'community' has been quantified into a string of cold numbers, pursuing the number of community members, seeking rapid growth, aiming for a cold start today, and achieving 500k results a month later.

Creating such things isn't actually difficult. On the contrary, this is currently the most mature go-to-market strategy in the crypto market, with complete links and tools to help the project team achieve such goals.

Such as various task platforms similar to Galxe, Telegram traffic tools, KOL matrices, etc. Mainly leveraging terms like 'zero-threshold participation', 'airdrop without effort', 'one fish, multiple bites', to attract a large number of opportunistic users, ultimately achieving so-called 'organic growth'.

But the result of this approach is also evident: the community members' profiles were directed from the very beginning to be those who exploit opportunities, ultimately leading to a situation where a large number of users characterized as 'opportunists' are attracted to form what the project team calls a 'community'.

If the project's goal is merely to quickly list tokens and then exit, then this approach is completely fine; it can even be said to be incredibly efficient, with no detours.

4/ Why is the community selling pressure instead of buying pressure?

Returning to the original question: why has the community now become selling pressure instead of buying pressure?

The answer is simple: because from the very beginning, the project team's positioning of the community and their go-to-market strategy have already determined the outcome.

The purpose of the project is to find these people to inflate their data. The initial goal of community members participating was to earn airdrops by contributing data and labor. Both sides understand that the other has no real value, yet they each get what they need, pretending to be confused. The coins sent out are essentially debts to the project, expenditures for providing data to users, rather than assets.

So when TGE happens, what else could these airdrops turn into if not selling pressure?