#近期热币 Review of the OM crash event

On March 20, community users monitored that a large OM holder's address withdrew coins and transferred them to the trading platform, with rumors claiming that OM had completed several large discounted OTC transactions. Subsequently, many large OM holders began to sell off, causing the coin price to continue to drop, and many OTC buyers were trapped, resulting in a spreading panic in the community, leading to a rush to sell.
In the early morning of April 14th, the OM price plummeted from 6.2u to 0.4u, a decline of over 90%, with a market value evaporating by 5.5 billion dollars in 2 hours.
On-chain data shows that before the flash crash of OM, tokens accounting for 4.5% of the circulating supply were deposited into CEX, with strategic investor Laser Digital suspected to be involved.
The MANTRA team has officially denied the rumors of "running away." They stated that the recent price crash was caused by "improper forced liquidation operations by other (CEX) during the low liquidity period in the early morning in Asia." The team further pointed out that they are suspicious of the exchange's negligence or potential market manipulation. At the same time, the MANTRA team emphasized that the project tokens are still locked and there has been no selling behavior from the team or core investors.
On-chain data analysis reveals that during the crash, the market was hit by a large-scale liquidation order shock, triggering a chain selling effect. Due to insufficient market depth, this series of sell-offs further exacerbated the downward price trend.

In summary, faced with the drastic fluctuations in the market, project parties, centralized exchanges (CEX), and market makers are all eager to distance themselves from responsibility. In contrast, retail investors often find themselves in a naturally disadvantaged position due to limited access to information. For those projects that rely on grand narratives such as "unlocking expectations" and "ecological blueprints" to support their high valuations, this bubble-like narrative approach is unlikely to be sustainable in the long run. Ultimately, these narrative bubbles are likely to burst, leading to a return of project values to rational or even lower levels.
This wave of plunge serves as a warning for us in two aspects -
1. Stay vigilant about the "FDV myth" and return to fundamental analysis. Real value should be based on protocol revenue and user growth, rather than paper valuation.
2. Don't hold high leverage positions during low liquidity periods; the losses will come slowly.