一年中最混亂的兩個令牌爆炸 - 運動實驗室的舉動醜聞和Mantra的OM的崩潰 - 通過加密貨幣的營銷業務向Shockwaves發出衝擊波。

在這兩種情況下，迅速的價格崩潰都揭示了隱藏的演員，可疑的令牌解鎖以及據稱是盲目的市場參與者的附帶協議，而OM在4月下旬沒有明顯催化劑的幾個小時內下降了90％以上。

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.

一年中最混亂的兩個令牌爆炸 - 運動實驗室的舉動醜聞和Mantra的OM的崩潰 - 通過加密貨幣的營銷業務向Shockwaves發出衝擊波。

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.

在這兩種情況下，迅速的價格崩潰都揭示了隱藏的演員，可疑的令牌解鎖以及據稱是盲目的市場參與者的附帶協議，而OM在4月下旬沒有明顯催化劑的幾個小時內下降了90％以上。

Unlike traditional finance, where market makers provide orderly bid-ask spreads on regulated venues, crypto market makers operate more like high-stakes trading desks. 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.

與傳統的金融公司不同，在受監管的場地上提供有序的出價差價，加密推銷商的運作更像是高風險交易台。他們不只是引用價格；他們正在談判發布前的代幣分配，接受鎖定，為集中交流構建流動性，有時還採取公平或諮詢股份。

The result is a murky space where liquidity provision is entangled with private deals, tokenomics, and often, insider politics.

結果是一個模糊的空間，流動性規定與私人交易，代幣學和經常是內部政治糾纏在一起。

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.

4月下旬的Coindeskexposé展示了一些運動實驗室高管如何與自己的做市商串通，以將價值3,800萬美元的搬家投入公開市場。

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?

現在，一些公司正在質疑他們在信任對手方面是否過於休閒。當令牌解鎖時間表不透明時，如何對沖位置？當握手悄悄地覆蓋道的提議時，會發生什麼？

"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.

總部位於香港的Metalpha的Metalpha的營銷部門在接受采訪時告訴Coindesk：“現在，我們的方法包括與項目團隊進行更廣泛的初步討論和教育會議。”

"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."

“我們的交易結構已經演變為強調短期績效指標的長期戰略一致性，並納入了針對不道德行為的特定保障措施，例如過度的令牌傾銷和人工交易量。”

Behind the scenes, conversations are intensifying. Deal terms are being scrutinized more carefully. Some liquidity desks are re-evaluating how they underwrite token risk. Others are demanding stricter transparency — or walking away from murky projects entirely.

在幕後，對話正在加劇。交易條款正在更仔細地審查。一些流動性桌正在重新評估它們如何承擔令牌風險。其他人則要求更加透明，或者完全離開黑暗的項目。

"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."

Metalpha的Web3生態系統Max Sun指出：“項目不再接受享有聲望的聲譽，因為他們目睹了即使是成熟的參與者如何利用影子分配或從事有害令牌銷售實踐。” “推定信任的時代已經得出結論。”

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.

在代幣發射公​​告和營銷協議的拋光錶面之下，是加密貨幣的另一層 - 次級OTC市場，在歸屬懸崖吸引了公眾眼前，鎖定的令牌悄然易手易手。

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.

一些交易員說，這些經常在早期支持者，資金和集團之間取得的桌子下的交易現在正在扭曲供應動態和偏斜的價格發現。對於負責提供有序流動性的做市商來說，他們成為越來越不透明和危險的變量。

"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, and $MOVE, and others — they're often the ones most actively traded on the secondary OTC market."

Presto Research的分析師Min Jung說：“二級OTC市場改變了行業的動態。” “如果您以可疑的價格行動（例如$ layer，$ om and $ move等）查看令牌，它們通常是在二級OTC市場上最積極交易的代幣。”

"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.

Jung補充說：“由於這些非市場的交易，整個供應時間表已經扭曲了，對於流動資金，真正的挑戰是弄清楚何時供應何時真正解鎖。”

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.

在一個小說和供應在後室談判的市場中，真正的風險對於交易者來說不是波動 - 它認為浮點是白皮書和創始人所說的。