What to know:
- Crypto market-making, once a beacon of hope, now trembles under the weight of scandals, those involving Movement Labs’ MOVE and Mantra’s OM tokens. A pox on their houses! 😠
- Market makers, those supposed pillars of stability, are now reevaluating token risk underwriting and demanding greater transparency. As if demanding it will conjure it from thin air! 🙄
- The secondary OTC market, a shadowy realm if ever there was one, is distorting token supply dynamics and complicating price discovery. Like trying to find truth in Pravda. 🤣
Two of the year’s most chaotic token blowups — Movement Labs’ MOVE scandal and the collapse of Mantra’s OM — are sending shockwaves through crypto’s market-making businesses. These events, like poorly constructed dachas, threaten to collapse the entire edifice.
In both cases, rapid price crashes revealed hidden actors, questionable token unlocks, and alleged side agreements that blinded market participants, with OM falling more than 90% within hours late April on no apparent catalyst. A spectacle of ruin, worthy of a Chekhov play, only with more rubles at stake. 💸
Unlike traditional finance, where market makers provide orderly bid-ask spreads on regulated venues, crypto market makers often operate more like high-stakes trading desks. A far cry from the solemn halls of legitimate commerce, more akin to a bazaar run by bandits.
They’re not just quoting prices; they’re negotiating pre-launch token allocations, accepting lockups, structuring liquidity for centralized exchanges, and sometimes taking equity or advisory stakes. A web of intrigue, worthy of the KGB itself. But with less accountability. 🤔
The result is a murky space where liquidity provision is entangled with private deals, tokenomics, and often, insider politics. Transparency, it seems, is as rare as a voluntary confession from a Politburo member. 🤫
A CoinDesk exposé in late April showed how some Movement Labs executives colluded with their own market maker to dump $38 million worth of MOVE in the open market. The scent of corruption hangs heavy in the air, like stale cabbage soup. 🍲
Now, some firms are questioning whether they’ve been too casual in trusting counterparties. How do you hedge a position when token unlock schedules are opaque? What happens when handshake deals quietly override DAO proposals? Questions that should have been asked long ago, but better late than never, I suppose. 🤷♂️
“Our approach now includes more extensive preliminary discussions and educational sessions with project teams to ensure they thoroughly understand market-making mechanics,” Hong Kong-based Metalpha’s market-making division told CoinDesk in an interview. As if mere discussions can cleanse the rot at the core. 🤦♂️
“Our deal structures have evolved to emphasize long-term strategic alignment over short-term performance metrics, incorporating specific safeguards against unethical behavior such as excessive token dumping and artificial trading volume,” it said. Fine words, but will they be matched by fine deeds? Time will tell. Or not. ⌚
Behind the scenes, conversations are intensifying. Deal terms are being scrutinized more carefully. Some liquidity desks are reevaluating how they underwrite token risk. The wolves are circling, sniffing for weakness. 🐺
Others are demanding stricter transparency — or walking away from murky projects altogether. A wise decision, to abandon the sinking ship before it drags you down with it. 🚢
“Projects no longer accept prestigious reputations at face value, having witnessed how even established players can exploit shadow allocations or engage in detrimental token selling practices,” Metalpha’s head of Web3 ecosystem Max Sun noted. “The era of presumptive trust has concluded,” he claimed. A fitting epitaph for this chapter of crypto history. 😔
Beneath the polished surface of token launch announcements and market-making agreements lies another layer of crypto finance — the secondary OTC market, where locked tokens quietly change hands well before vesting cliffs hit the public eye. A subterranean world, where the real deals are made, far from the prying eyes of regulators. 👀
These under-the-table deals, often struck between early backers, funds, and syndicates, are now distorting supply dynamics and skewing price discovery, some traders say. And for market makers tasked with providing orderly liquidity, they’re becoming an increasingly opaque and dangerous variable. Like navigating a minefield blindfolded. 💣
“The secondary OTC market has changed the dynamics of the industry,” said Min Jung, analyst at Presto Research, which runs a market-making unit. “If you look at tokens with suspicious price action — like $LAYER, $OM, $MOVE, and others — they’re often the ones most actively traded on the secondary OTC market.” A damning indictment, if ever there was one. ⚖️
“The entire supply and vesting schedule has become distorted because of these off-market deals, and for liquid funds, the real challenge is figuring out when supply is actually unlocking,” Jung added. A puzzle wrapped in an enigma, shrouded in secrecy. Like trying to decipher the workings of the Kremlin itself. 🤯
In a market where price is fiction and supply is negotiated in back rooms, the real risk isn’t volatility for traders — it is believing the float is what the whitepaper and founders say it is. A fool’s errand, to trust the words of those with vested interests. Caveat emptor! ⚠️
Read More
- Silver Rate Forecast
- SPEC PREDICTION. SPEC cryptocurrency
- USD PHP PREDICTION
- OM PREDICTION. OM cryptocurrency
- ETHFI PREDICTION. ETHFI cryptocurrency
- RUNE PREDICTION. RUNE cryptocurrency
- Solana’s Meltdown: $111M Longs Liquidate Like It’s Going Out of Style! 💸🔥
- ILV PREDICTION. ILV cryptocurrency
- DOT PREDICTION. DOT cryptocurrency
- ZK PREDICTION. ZK cryptocurrency
2025-05-17 12:25