summary：
Generated Title: Monad's Messy Launch: Spoofing, Swipes, and a Side of "Dogsh*t"Monad's m... Generated Title: Monad's Messy Launch: Spoofing, Swipes, and a Side of "Dogsh*t"
Monad's mainnet launch was supposed to be a triumphant entry into the crowded Layer-1 blockchain arena. Touted as an Ethereum and Solana killer with its promise of 10,000 transactions per second, the reality has been…messier. Within days, users reported spoofed token transfers, and Arthur Hayes, never one to mince words, publicly labeled the token "dogsh*t" after initially endorsing it. Let's dissect the data and see what's really going on.
The Spoofing Situation: A Calculated Attack
The initial reports of spoofed token transfers are particularly concerning. According to Monad's CTO, James Hunsaker, bad actors emitted fake ERC-20 events, making it appear as though transfers were occurring when no actual funds moved. Shan Zhang, chief information security officer at Slowmist, explained that this is a common tactic during chain launches when users are setting up new wallets and bridging funds. Scammers create "vanity addresses" that mimic users' real addresses, hoping they'll copy the wrong one when making transactions. Monad Hit With Spoofed Token Transfers Days After Mainnet Launch
The concerning part isn't necessarily that this attack happened. These types of scams are relatively common. The issue is that it highlights a vulnerability in how explorers display data, potentially misleading users who are new to the ecosystem. It's akin to a phishing scam targeting the technologically inept, but on a blockchain. How can Monad, or any new chain, build trust when the tools designed to provide transparency are easily manipulated?
The Hayes' "Dogsh*t" Declaration: A Market Sentiment Indicator?
Then there's the curious case of Arthur Hayes. Two days after predicting MON could rise to $10, he reversed course, urging his followers to "send this dogsh*t to ZERO!" (his emphasis, not mine). This abrupt about-face isn't just a random tweet; it's a potential indicator of market sentiment, albeit a volatile one. Hayes has a history of making bullish calls on altcoins that subsequently retreat, leading some to believe his endorsement is a contrarian signal. Arthur Hayes Tells Followers to ‘Send Monad to Zero’ After Predicting Surge Two Days Earlier
Is Hayes's flip a sign of deeper problems with Monad, or simply a reflection of his own trading strategy? It's hard to say definitively, but the price action following his initial endorsement and subsequent condemnation suggests his pronouncements carry weight with some segments of the market. (Whether that's a good thing for those segments is another question.)
It's also worth noting the timing. Hayes's reversal coincided with the spoofing reports. Did the security concerns contribute to his change of heart? Or did he simply see an opportunity to capitalize on the initial hype and then exit his position? The available data leaves this question unanswered, but it's a critical piece of the puzzle.
Airdrop Aftermath and Tokenomics: The Numbers Game
Monad's launch included an airdrop, with roughly 76,000 wallets claiming MON. The initial circulating supply included 38.5 billion MON for ecosystem development, 3.3 billion for the community airdrop, and 7.5 billion from the token sale. The problem? The price briefly fell below the token sale price of $0.025 immediately after launch.
This raises questions about the tokenomics and the long-term sustainability of the project. While the price has since recovered somewhat (trading around $0.042 shortly after launch, a 19% increase from the day before), the initial dip suggests a lack of immediate demand relative to the supply. The project locked 50.7% of the total MON supply upon launch, with vesting set to ramp up quarterly from 2026 through 2029. This vesting schedule is designed to incentivize long-term commitment from the team and investors, but it also creates a potential overhang of supply that could weigh on the price in the future. I've looked at hundreds of these vesting schedules, and this particular one is fairly standard.
And this is the part of the report that I find genuinely puzzling: Why launch with such a large circulating supply if you're not confident in the immediate demand? Is it an attempt to create initial buzz and liquidity, even at the risk of a price dip? Or is it a miscalculation of the market's appetite for another Layer-1 blockchain?
So, What's the Real Story?
Monad's launch highlights the challenges of entering a crowded market. The combination of security vulnerabilities, volatile market sentiment (fueled by figures like Arthur Hayes), and questionable tokenomics creates a recipe for uncertainty. The promise of high throughput and EVM compatibility is enticing, but the execution needs to be flawless to win over users and developers. Right now, the data suggests Monad has a long way to go.