This seems pretty on-brand for a <i>Squid Game</i> themed token, honestly. I'm not sure what else buyers were expecting. (Were they expecting this to be like an episode of <i>Oprah</i> where the audience all get a free car?)
I have been following this , since the day squidgame launched and the marketcap was very very small, it was quite trivial to know this was a scam as laid out by its whitepaper itself, which specified how low the prescribed allowed sell amount was.<p>Most people who are regular in this space , actively tried to spread the word out that its a scam and cautioned against buying it.<p>Yet coinmarketcap and the likes kept promoting it in their trending list , it was trivial for coinmarketcap to check programmatically this was a scam.<p>Given how much they make in terms of promotions and listing , they should have 100% checked the listing thoroughly before promoting it throughout the day in its trending list.<p>Its simply a lack of ethics and corruption from companies like coinmarketcap , businessinsider , etc which actively promoted this scam without even researching it well.
This is hilarious. Taking money away from anyone stupid enough to "invest" in cryptocurrency is almost a public service. It's like confiscating booze and car keys from 16 year olds.
At first I thought this sounded like another scam coin, but the devs created the squid token and marbles only "earned by taking part in the project’s play-to-earn game. Only those who have accrued Marbles actually have the ability to sell their SQUID on the open market. "<p>And then to play the game you need to wager 456 squid which you might lose. That's hilarious. I wondered how a "play to earn" scheme might work but this is basically gambling.<p>Who cares about "investors" who are too dumb to do research. This isn't investing by buying non-direct shares of a Chinese company with sketchy accounting, those I would feel bad for. This is "investing" by buying a joke coin and hoping some sucker buys it from you.
> However, they were surprised when they learned of the “anti-dumping mechanism,” which in hindsight now appears to be more of an anti-selling mechanism.<p>> Here’s the problem: the project’s creators didn’t just create one token, they created two.<p>> The other cryptocurrency is called Marbles — and this asset can only be earned by taking part in the project’s play-to-earn game. Only those who have accrued Marbles actually have the ability to sell their SQUID on the open market.<p>This is one of the most blatant scams, or really traps as far as crypto tokens go. So clearly this token had forced liquidity issues.<p>> Unfortunately, many of the articles published about SQUID failed to make it clear this token is not officially affiliated with Netflix — giving it a sheen of respectability that may have lulled investors into a false sense of security.<p>Is it really expected that the token was related to Netflix? Its a meme-coin and thats not new. If you think you're "investing" in coins and this is how you invest, then you're not a good investor. You may think you're investing, but you're just buying into a joke. This is why the SEC has rules around investments, and this is why everyone is told that good practice is to buy indexes. People _should_ know better but often don't.<p>Also, it looks like there was something fishy going on to trick people into thinking the token was valuable, either intentionally or accidentally. It looks like there was a liquidity issue, and that could have enabled a large holder to push the price really high in a short time - because if not enough people are selling, then whatever price some rando asks can be the new market price. That would also explain the immediate crash - the whale was done and left.<p>> CoinMarketCap had received multiple reports of users struggling to sell SQUID on the decentralized exchange PancakeSwap.<p>It looks like coin had very low liquidity.<p>> Just 35 minutes later — at 9.35am — SQUID appeared to hit highs of $2,861.80. A surge of 7,500% in three-and-a-half hours is unheard of… even in the notoriously volatile world of cryptocurrencies.<p>And it seems like some one over-paid or otherwise pushed the price high, probably also some frenzy and excitement thrown in.
Is somebody who spends their money buying a bunch of lottery tickets an investor?<p>I don't think this can be called investing, and I don't think the folks who got taken for a ride here deserve to be called "investors".
> Unfortunately, many of the articles published about SQUID failed to make it clear this token is not officially affiliated with Netflix — giving it a sheen of respectability that may have lulled investors into a false sense of security.<p>Stellar job by Auntie Beeb.