From Sahara to Tradoor: A Look at Recent "Creative Downtrend" Tactics in Altcoins

Airdrops turn into “bear markets,” and project benefits become insiders’ ATMs. From Sahara AI, aPriori to Irys and Tradoor, newly launched altcoins have crashed one after another—plunging 50% in a single day, dropping over 80%, with airdrops being dumped en masse—casting a shadow over the crypto space.

(Previously: Meteora Airdrop Trust Disaster: 4 Whales Grab 28.5%, Over 60,000 Retail Users Only Share 7%) (Background: Why ICOs Are Dominating On-Chain Fundraising Again? The Three Underlying Reasons Beating Airdrops)

Airdrops turn into “bear markets,” and project benefits become insiders’ ATMs. Even though the market has warmed up recently, the crypto world has remained shrouded in a lingering gloom since the “1011 Crash.” What stands out is a wave of newly launched altcoins seemingly having their “downward switch” turned on in unison, repeatedly suffering dramatic crashes: daily price halving, drops over 80%, surges at launch followed by steady declines, and airdrop tokens being dumped en masse. Notably, much of this abnormal activity has been concentrated among new projects listed on Binance Alpha.

In just a few weeks, multiple “bizarre crash” events have occurred one after another. On-chain fund movements, market maker operations, and responses—or silence—from project teams have pieced together fragments of the truth behind the turmoil. Below, Odaily Planet Daily reviews several of the most discussed and representative “fancy crash” cases from recent weeks.

Sahara AI: Over 50% Crash in a Short Time, Driven by Large-Scale Perpetual Liquidations + Short Pressure

On the evening of November 29, Sahara AI’s token SAHARA plunged over 50% in a short time, and the price has not significantly recovered since, currently at $0.03869.

SAHARA K-line Chart

The next day, the Sahara AI team quickly issued a statement to reassure the market, with three main points:

• No team or investor dumping: Everyone is still in the lock-up period, with a full year until the first unlock (June 2026).
• No smart contract issues: No hacks, no tampering, no unexplained token transfers.
• Business is adjusting but nothing is wrong: Some internal resource integration, focusing on accelerating growth areas.

These all sound “harmless,” but the community’s focus was elsewhere. KOL Crypto Fearless posted on X, claiming that SAHARA’s abnormal crash was due to “a proactive market maker being liquidated in a chain reaction”: a major market maker running multiple projects was targeted by an exchange, triggering risk controls that affected all related positions—SAHARA was just collateral damage.

However, Sahara AI’s official team quickly denied this explanation, emphasizing that their market makers are only Amber Group and Herring Global, both operating normally, with no investigations or liquidations. The team’s version is that the plunge was mainly due to large-scale liquidations in perpetual contracts and concentrated short selling. In other words, “it’s not our fault; it’s a structural stampede in the market itself.” The team is still in direct communication with relevant exchanges and will disclose more verified information in due course.

aPriori: 60% of Airdrop Extracted, Token Down Nearly 80% Since Launch

aPriori is a high-profile project in the Monad ecosystem. Its token APR launched on BNB Chain ahead of the Monad mainnet’s debut. On October 23, APR went live on Binance Alpha and Binance Futures, briefly surging above $0.7 at launch before falling steadily to $0.13. The weak price performance after launch had already raised concerns, but the real flashpoint came weeks later.

APR K-line Chart

The most glaring news: 60% of the project’s airdrop was claimed by a single entity using 14,000 addresses. On November 11, Bubblemaps revealed that 60% of aPriori’s airdrop tokens were collected by one entity through 14,000 interconnected wallets. These wallets each deposited 0.001 BNB to Binance in a short period, then transferred APR tokens to a new batch of wallets.

APR “Insider Wallet” Cluster Map

What angered the community even more than the data itself was the project’s complete lack of response. On November 14, Bubblemaps stated they had contacted the aPriori team early on, seeking an explanation for the “60% airdrop claimed by one entity through 14,000 addresses,” but still had not received a response.

Similarly, blockchain investigator ZachXBT posted on X that he had privately messaged aPriori’s co-founder for an explanation about the “insider wallets,” but as of November 18, still had no reply.

Meanwhile, the project’s official X account stopped updating, Discord admins virtually disappeared, and community sentiment turned from disappointment to anger:

• “Did the project team already run away?”
• “Is the team working on the next project now?”
• “How can a high-profile project do this?”

It wasn’t until November 21 that the team finally spoke out, but they didn’t address the core concerns—instead stating “no evidence that the team or foundation claimed the airdrop” and trying to shift attention to the Monad mainnet airdrop, promising the Monad community “a large amount of unlocked APR airdrop.” This statement failed to quell doubts and was interpreted by many as “dodging the real issue.”

Worse, on the day the Monad mainnet launched, aPriori’s token airdrop event received almost no attention, and official channels fell silent again. The transition from a high-profile, well-funded project to rapid community trust loss took less than a month.

Irys: One Entity Claimed 20% of Airdrop Using 900 Wallets, Already Dumped $4 Million

Irys is a Layer 1 blockchain focusing on “data intelligence,” with nearly $20 million in funding. However, its airdrop and pre-mainnet on-chain activity triggered market suspicion of “insider dumping” for profit.

Day Before Launch: 900 Addresses Funded Simultaneously

On November 28, on-chain analytics platform Bubblemaps revealed that, the day before the IRYS mainnet launch, a total of 900 addresses received ETH transferred from Bitget exchange during several time windows. These addresses shared highly consistent characteristics:

• No prior on-chain activity (brand new wallets);
• Similar amounts of ETH received;
• All claimed the IRYS airdrop on launch day.

These addresses collectively claimed about 20% of the IRYS airdrop.

Further Analysis: Typical Sybil Cluster

Bubblemaps divided these 900 addresses into 20 funding batches, about 50 addresses per batch, and found:

• Timing: From November 21 to 24, Bitget executed 20 rounds of deposits;
• Highly consistent pattern: Each batch received small amounts of ETH, with nearly identical address generation, activation, and operation paths;
• Features: Addresses became active in a short time, with similar behavioral patterns.

This behavior fits the typical characteristics of a “Sybil cluster,” indicating a well-organized attempt…