PANews reported on October 10th that according to CoinDesk, several new tokens have recently experienced significant pullbacks after their launch, raising questions about the Time-Based Enabling (TGE) model ahead of a series of airdrops. CAMP, the native token of the AI-powered Layer1 blockchain, has plummeted 88% since its launch last month, while DoubleZero's 2Z token has lost 60% of its value in just eight days. Anoma's XAN token has also seen a significant drop, falling 60% in a week. XPL's price fell below its TGE issue price on Friday due to widespread negative sentiment surrounding the alleged founding team token sale, a claim denied by the company's founder. There are several reasons behind the dismal performance of newly listed tokens. One is excessive pre-launch hype, which means that when the tokens finally come to market, users are often content to receive a return on their investment rather than continue to increase their holdings. Another reason is token economics. XPL's woes were attributed to $813 million worth of "ecosystem and growth" tokens, which were allegedly sold through market makers, putting pressure on prices and exceeding retail investor demand. With major airdrops coming up for MetaMask, OpenSea, and Monad, some worry that the 2025 "airdrop season" could see similarly weak performance if supply outstrips demand.PANews reported on October 10th that according to CoinDesk, several new tokens have recently experienced significant pullbacks after their launch, raising questions about the Time-Based Enabling (TGE) model ahead of a series of airdrops. CAMP, the native token of the AI-powered Layer1 blockchain, has plummeted 88% since its launch last month, while DoubleZero's 2Z token has lost 60% of its value in just eight days. Anoma's XAN token has also seen a significant drop, falling 60% in a week. XPL's price fell below its TGE issue price on Friday due to widespread negative sentiment surrounding the alleged founding team token sale, a claim denied by the company's founder. There are several reasons behind the dismal performance of newly listed tokens. One is excessive pre-launch hype, which means that when the tokens finally come to market, users are often content to receive a return on their investment rather than continue to increase their holdings. Another reason is token economics. XPL's woes were attributed to $813 million worth of "ecosystem and growth" tokens, which were allegedly sold through market makers, putting pressure on prices and exceeding retail investor demand. With major airdrops coming up for MetaMask, OpenSea, and Monad, some worry that the 2025 "airdrop season" could see similarly weak performance if supply outstrips demand.

Analysis: Plummeting prices of new tokens like CAMP, XAN, and XPL raise questions about the TGE model

2025/10/10 23:18

PANews reported on October 10th that according to CoinDesk, several new tokens have recently experienced significant pullbacks after their launch, raising questions about the Time-Based Enabling (TGE) model ahead of a series of airdrops. CAMP, the native token of the AI-powered Layer1 blockchain, has plummeted 88% since its launch last month, while DoubleZero's 2Z token has lost 60% of its value in just eight days. Anoma's XAN token has also seen a significant drop, falling 60% in a week. XPL's price fell below its TGE issue price on Friday due to widespread negative sentiment surrounding the alleged founding team token sale, a claim denied by the company's founder.

There are several reasons behind the dismal performance of newly listed tokens. One is excessive pre-launch hype, which means that when the tokens finally come to market, users are often content to receive a return on their investment rather than continue to increase their holdings. Another reason is token economics. XPL's woes were attributed to $813 million worth of "ecosystem and growth" tokens, which were allegedly sold through market makers, putting pressure on prices and exceeding retail investor demand. With major airdrops coming up for MetaMask, OpenSea, and Monad, some worry that the 2025 "airdrop season" could see similarly weak performance if supply outstrips demand.

Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact [email protected] for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.
Share Insights

You May Also Like

Cashing In On University Patents Means Giving Up On Our Innovation Future

Cashing In On University Patents Means Giving Up On Our Innovation Future

The post Cashing In On University Patents Means Giving Up On Our Innovation Future appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. “It’s a raid on American innovation that would deliver pennies to the Treasury while kneecapping the very engine of our economic and medical progress,” writes Pipes. Getty Images Washington is addicted to taxing success. Now, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick is floating a plan to skim half the patent earnings from inventions developed at universities with federal funding. It’s being sold as a way to shore up programs like Social Security. In reality, it’s a raid on American innovation that would deliver pennies to the Treasury while kneecapping the very engine of our economic and medical progress. Yes, taxpayer dollars support early-stage research. But the real payoff comes later—in the jobs created, cures discovered, and industries launched when universities and private industry turn those discoveries into real products. By comparison, the sums at stake in patent licensing are trivial. Universities collectively earn only about $3.6 billion annually in patent income—less than the federal government spends on Social Security in a single day. Even confiscating half would barely register against a $6 trillion federal budget. And yet the damage from such a policy would be anything but trivial. The true return on taxpayer investment isn’t in licensing checks sent to Washington, but in the downstream economic activity that federally supported research unleashes. Thanks to the bipartisan Bayh-Dole Act of 1980, universities and private industry have powerful incentives to translate early-stage discoveries into real-world products. Before Bayh-Dole, the government hoarded patents from federally funded research, and fewer than 5% were ever licensed. Once universities could own and license their own inventions, innovation exploded. The result has been one of the best returns on investment in government history. Since 1996, university research has added nearly $2 trillion to U.S. industrial output, supported 6.5 million jobs, and launched more than 19,000 startups. Those companies pay…
Share
2025/09/18 03:26