SOL 为何大幅下跌?深度链上分析给你答案

Foresight NewsPublished on 2025-02-26Last updated on 2025-02-26

Abstract

这次周期里从未发生过如此多的诈骗活动,而且现在都这么公开地进行。每三个没钱的名人就有一个在谈论加密货币,并在 SOL 上推出代币。然后,他们在几天内把代币拉盘 -99%,而且是在大家眼皮底下做的,这些事件让人失去了信心。

撰文:0xDecision,链上分析师

编译:zhouzhou,BlockBeats

编者按:本文分析了 SOL、TRUMP、LIBRA 和 MELANIA 等代币对市场的影响,指出这些项目导致了 Solana 生态系统的崩溃。特别是特朗普及其妻子的代币推广和拉盘,给投资者带来了重大损失。此外,预计 2025 年 3 月 1 日 SOL 将解锁大量代币,可能导致价格大幅下跌。文章还提到加密市场面临大量诈骗、黑客攻击等问题,但稳定币指数仍在上升。

以下为原文内容(为便于阅读理解,原内容有所整编):

我花了超过 10 小时分析 SOL 发生了什么,TRUMP、LIBRA 和 MELANIA 摧毁了这条链,目前只有一个决定扭转了市场,这是你在崩盘前保护资金可以采取的措施。

Solana 是一个特别快速的区块链,适用于应用和加密项目。

它专为速度和低成本而建,使交易既快速又便宜。

目前,SOL 因为一些问题而处于困境。

一个月前,SOL 价格大约在 270,现在已经下跌了 30%,这可能是即将到来的大跌的开始。我查阅了所有的事实,结果让我震惊……

美国总统特朗普推出了 TRUMP 的 meme 币,而 SOL 正创下新高。他的举动伤害了整个市场,引发了混乱。启动后,资金开始从其他 meme 币流向 TRUMP。在 TRUMP meme 币发布的第一周,特朗普的数百个钱包出售了超过 20 亿美元的 TRUMP。这导致了图表崩盘,投资者损失惨重,纷纷撤离,这是引发 Solana 生态系统崩溃的导火索。

看到提款如此轻松后,特朗普的妻子推出了 MELANIA meme 币,这次比 TRUMP 还要糟糕。投资者在前 12 小时内损失了超过 90%,而团队提取了超过 5 亿美元。

2025 年 3 月 1 日,最大的 SOL 代币解锁将发生。约 22 亿美元的代币将被释放,这将导致价格大幅下跌,许多持有长仓的投资者会卖出以锁定利润,从而引发大规模的挤压。

一周前,@JMilei 在 Twitter 上推广了一个巨大的骗局。他还在 Instagram 上多次分享了这个骗局代币的合约地址。该代币的市值在短短一小时内从 1000 万美元飙升至 40 亿美元,但很快又在几小时内崩盘,降至 1 亿美元。

这次周期里从未发生过如此多的诈骗活动,而且现在都这么公开地进行。每三个没钱的名人就有一个在谈论加密货币,并在 SOL 上推出代币。然后,他们在几天内把代币拉盘 -99%,而且是在大家眼皮底下做的,这些事件让人失去了信心。

加密货币历史上最大的黑客攻击导致了 ETH 的大幅下跌。Bybit 被黑客攻击,15 亿美元的 ETH 被盗,这是一个巨大的损失。黑客攻击总是会伤害市场和人们的信心。

另一方面,稳定币指数仍远低于以往周期的水平,这个指数显示了有多少新资金进入加密市场。目前,它才刚刚开始上涨。

从整体来看,情况并不像表面那么糟糕,但事实是:我们现在处于不信任阶段。这样的时刻往往是最好的机会,在市场回暖之前,学习新技能、提升自己,这样你才能成为这个周期结束时的赢家。

Trending Cryptos

Related Reads

Countdown to Q-Day: Will Quantum Computing End Cryptocurrencies?

The article explores the existential threat quantum computing poses to cryptocurrencies and the urgent need for "post-quantum" migration. It outlines that quantum computers, through Shor's algorithm, could break the elliptic-curve cryptography (ECC) underlying blockchain security, potentially allowing private keys to be derived from public keys. The core challenge is not a lack of post-quantum cryptography (PQC) standards—like NIST's ML-KEM and ML-DSA—but the immense complexity of upgrading entire ecosystems before "Q-Day" (when quantum computers become capable of such attacks, estimated around 2035-2045). Key points include: * **Bitcoin's** risk is concentrated in legacy UTXOs with exposed public keys (e.g., early P2PK outputs). Migration faces massive hurdles: PQC signatures are much larger, increasing transaction size and cost, and the governance dilemma of handling un-migrated assets threatens its "code is law" ethos. * **Ethereum's** strategy focuses on "cryptographic agility," using Account Abstraction for user accounts and developing compressed hash-based signatures (like leanXMSS with SNARK aggregation) for consensus. Its migration is a complex, full-stack overhaul of execution, consensus, and data layers. * The "security debt" is enormous. The comfortable engineering window for a coordinated, ecosystem-wide upgrade is only 5-8 years. High-value infrastructure (exchanges, bridges) may face pressure before mainnet protocols. In conclusion, quantum computing is not an instant "doomsday" event but a forcing function for systemic change. Bitcoin's ultimate test is social consensus and property rights governance, while Ethereum's is technical complexity. Failure to migrate in time could lead to a fundamental re-pricing of crypto assets.

链捕手3m ago

Countdown to Q-Day: Will Quantum Computing End Cryptocurrencies?

链捕手3m ago

Losing $55 Million to Sell Bitcoin, MicroStrategy's Faith Reaches Its Interest Payment Day

On July 6th, Michael Saylor's MicroStrategy announced the sale of 3,588 BTC for approximately $216 million, incurring a realized loss of around $55.45 million compared to its average cost basis. This move, contradicting Saylor's long-standing "never sell" Bitcoin philosophy, was executed to pay dividends on its digital credit securities. The article traces this shift from a small "desensitization test" sale of 32 BTC in late May to the board's authorization on June 30th to sell up to $1.25 billion in Bitcoin for corporate purposes like dividends and buybacks. Analysis reveals that MicroStrategy's previous growth "flywheel"—using stock premiums to fund more Bitcoin purchases—has stalled. With its stock trading near a critical threshold (1.22x its Bitcoin NAV), issuing new shares would dilute value. Simultaneously, its financing channels (preferred stock, common stock ATM, convertible notes) are constrained while facing rigid annual dividend/interest obligations of roughly $1.76 billion. Consequently, selling Bitcoin became the calculated "optimal solution" under its own financial model. This transforms MicroStrategy from crypto's most prominent steady buyer into a predictable seller, creating a potential overhead of ~2,400 BTC in monthly selling pressure if obligations are fully covered by sales. This shift challenges the valuation models of the entire Digital Asset Treasury (DAT) sector that emulated MicroStrategy. The company's path forward now hinges on Bitcoin's price recovery, which would allow its preferred stock to trade at par and reopen its financing flywheel, creating a cyclical dependency between the firm's financial model and the asset it holds.

链捕手31m ago

Losing $55 Million to Sell Bitcoin, MicroStrategy's Faith Reaches Its Interest Payment Day

链捕手31m ago

OUSD Fake Partnership Controversy? Stablecoins and the Credit Game of Giant Endorsements

Author: Chloe, ChainCatcher Last week, Open Standard launched the dollar stablecoin OpenUSD (OUSD) with a list of over 140 supposedly supporting companies, including major names like Visa, Mastercard, Stripe, American Express, BlackRock, BNY, Standard Chartered, Google, Shopify, Samsung, Coinbase, Solana, and Ripple. The announcement initially impacted Circle's stock price, but doubts about the list quickly emerged. Several Korean firms named, including Samsung Electronics, Shinhan Financial Group, Dunamu (Upbit's parent), and K Bank, clarified they had not formally agreed to join the alliance. Some stated they were only approached for potential interest or learned of their inclusion from news reports, expressing surprise. Similar concerns were raised by U.S. entities, suggesting the list may be misleading. OUSD, led by Zach Abrams of Bridge (acquired by Stripe in 2024), promotes zero-fee minting/redemption, no transaction limits, and sharing reserve asset yields with partners instead of keeping profits. However, this model makes listed partnership imply economic benefits, turning it into a serious credibility issue. This incident reflects a common crypto marketing tactic of leveraging big names. A Chainstory analysis found over 62% of crypto press releases in late 2025 were high-risk or scams. The situation recalls Facebook's Libra (later Diem), which collapsed in 2022 after initial heavyweight backers like Visa and PayPal withdrew under regulatory pressure. Circle CEO Jeremy Allaire welcomed the competition but highlighted the challenges. He argued stablecoin success relies on network effects and real usage, not just alliances. He criticized OUSD's "free" model and full revenue sharing as potentially starving infrastructure development. Noting the dominance of USDT (~$1.84T) and USDC (~$730B) in the ~$2.91T stablecoin market, he suggested many new entrants lack real utility despite inflated circulation from incentives. In conclusion, while OUSD has genuine backing and a distinct model, its future depends on actual adoption in B2B payments, settlements, and cross-border transactions, not just a prestigious partner list. The market will determine if it is a credible challenger or merely another marketing promise.

链捕手34m ago

OUSD Fake Partnership Controversy? Stablecoins and the Credit Game of Giant Endorsements

链捕手34m ago

Trading

Spot

Hot Articles

Discussions

Welcome to the HTX Community. Here, you can stay informed about the latest platform developments and gain access to professional market insights. Users' opinions on the price of SOL (SOL) are presented below.

活动图片