TGE失败真相:做市商陷阱与代币经济学的致命漏洞

比推Publicado em 2025-11-14Última atualização em 2025-11-14

作者:Antonio Sco

编译:Luffy,Foresight News

原标题:为何 90% 的项目 TGE 都惨淡收场?


过去两年,我合作过 30 多个 Pre-TGE 项目,从中发现了三个意想不到的关键原因,正是这些因素导致大多数代币在 TGE 中惨败。

那些融资数百万美元的项目在重复同样的错误,我总结出了一些规律:失败的项目不会公开问题,只会忙着责怪他人;成功的项目也不会分享秘诀,只想独占所有功劳。

这就让新创始人陷入了迷茫,完全不知道该如何下手。那么,哪些是 TGE 的核心关键?缺少它们,TGE 就注定失败,因此创始人必须把大部分时间投入其中。

作为一家营销公司的创始人,我很不情愿承认,但答案不是营销。营销能放大良好的基本面,但如果没有坚实的基础,再华丽的营销也只是空中楼阁,一推就倒。

以下是三个很少被提及、却能摧毁 TGE 项目的核心因素。

做市商

选择做市商,本质上就像在玩俄罗斯轮盘赌:

  • 最好的情况:双方激励一致,有利润就共同分享;

  • 最坏的情况:他们在背后算计你,让你数年的心血付诸东流。

信息不对称的问题十分可怕,他们只会向你展示成功案例,绝口不提那些失败的经历。

那么,该如何选择做市商?99.9% 的情况下,你应该选择由你信任的项目方或直接合作过的人强力推荐的做市商。

不要相信陌生人的推荐,他们能从做市商那里拿到丰厚的推荐费,即便对方不靠谱,也会极力推荐。

一个重要提醒:项目失败了,承担后果的是你,不是他们。

就算你有最好的营销、最活跃的社区和最顶尖的团队,只要做市商让你的代币价格暴跌 50%,你也无力回天。

代币经济学

代币经济学也是同理,你和你的团队可能还没研究过 50 个代币模型,也没见过它们的实际效果。

你绝对不能照搬成功项目的代币经济学,就认为它对你也同样适用。投资者的目标和胃口一直在变,如果你想吸引他们买入,就必须随之调整。

同样,顾问只会给你看他们手中的成功案例,那些归零的项目你根本看不到。

额外补充一点:如果当前的代币经济学注定会搞垮你的项目,那就果断修改。

不要在乎:

  • 空投猎人会愤怒;

  • 社交媒体上的人会抱怨;

  • 种子轮投资者会不满。

如果按照当前的代币模型,一周后代币价格暴跌 90%,他们照样会不满,区别只是你会在三个月内倒闭。

显然,最好的解决方案是从一开始就避免这种情况,但正如一句古罗马谚语所说:「绝境需用险招」。

交易所上币

这一点是我最想强调的。做市商和代币经济学的问题只会在 TGE 后显现,但与交易所合作,是 TGE 前最痛苦、最危险的事情。

为什么痛苦?

  • 沟通极其困难;

  • 很难协调出一致的时间表;

  • 他们经常在最后一刻变卦,导致你不得不推迟 TGE。

为什么危险?

  • 掠夺性条款会拖垮你的项目;

  • 很多团队会被假代表诈骗;

  • 花费数百万美元上币,最终只引来卖压,没有任何买盘。

解决这个问题的最快方法:认识交易所内部人员,并且了解上币成本基准,避免被敲竹杠。

由于信息不对称,很多团队在初步谈判中就浪费了数十万美元。

结语

所有人都在等待更好的市场环境再启动 TGE,但如果以上三点你没做好,再好的市场也无法让你的代币站稳脚跟。作为创始人,你应该把主要精力放在这三件事上,同时监督团队其他成员做好各自领域的工作。


Twitter:https://twitter.com/BitpushNewsCN

比推 TG 交流群:https://t.me/BitPushCommunity

比推 TG 订阅: https://t.me/bitpush

说明: 比推所有文章只代表作者观点,不构成投资建议
TEG

Leituras Relacionadas

Behind Robinhood's Chain Launch and Tokenized Stocks: No Equity Rights, How Far Can This Packaging Game Go?

Robinhood is launching its own Layer 2 blockchain (Robinhood Chain) and "tokenized stocks," but these are not actual equity shares. The tokens are legally structured as debt securities or derivatives, offering economic exposure to a reference stock without granting voting rights or direct ownership. This move represents Robinhood's strategy to expand from a traditional brokerage into a "financial super app," building a user-friendly, programmable financial interface on top of complex, legally compliant, and jurisdiction-specific backend structures. The company's existing business remains strong, driven by options, event contracts, and stock trading. The new blockchain and tokenization efforts are an ambitious layer of infrastructure built atop this core, aiming to make financial products more portable and globally accessible via crypto rails. Key components include the Robinhood Wallet, Bitstamp acquisition (for institutional reach), the Lighter perpetual contracts platform, and Robinhood Earn (DeFi yield). The central challenge is the "brokerage chain paradox": maintaining a simple, intuitive user experience while the underlying assets are highly structured, regulated, and legally distinct from direct ownership. The success of this strategy depends on users, developers, and regulators accepting this model. If the complexity is misunderstood or deemed misleading, it could create product liability issues and stall expansion. The initiative is a significant infrastructure play, but its long-term viability hinges on navigating this fundamental tension between simplicity and legal reality.

marsbitHá 44m

Behind Robinhood's Chain Launch and Tokenized Stocks: No Equity Rights, How Far Can This Packaging Game Go?

marsbitHá 44m

Zhipu, Afraid of Becoming the Next MiniMax

Title: Zhipu, Fearing to Become the Next MiniMax In July 2026, amid the success of its coding-focused AI, Zhipu's founder, Tang Jie, issued an internal letter titled "The Giant Wave Has Come." It notably avoided celebrating recent triumphs, such as Zhipu's trillion-HKD market cap and booming MaaS revenue driven by its GLM-5.2 model in coding applications. Instead, the letter pivoted the narrative to future-oriented concepts like Long Horizon Task, Autonomous Agents, Self-Evolving systems, and AGI. This strategic shift in messaging followed the sharp devaluation of its competitor, MiniMax. After its lock-up period expired, MiniMax's stock plummeted as the market began evaluating it with traditional SaaS metrics like ARR and user growth, rather than as a frontier AI pioneer. Seeing this, Tang Jie aimed to preempt a similar revaluation of Zhipu. He fears that if the market starts viewing Zhipu primarily as a profitable "AI coding company," its valuation would become anchored to conventional financial metrics, losing the premium associated with AGI potential. Therefore, the letter reframed Zhipu's mission. While acknowledging that coding was the current commercial driver, Tang positioned Zhipu on the "infrastructure path," akin to OpenAI and Anthropic. The new focus is on developing agents capable of complex, long-term planning and autonomous operation—moving from assisting individuals (OPC: One Person Company) to automating entire organizations (NPC: No People Company). This "Touch High" plan explicitly prioritizes long-term AGI research over short-term monetization. The article frames this as a critical divergence in China's AI landscape: the "commercialization path" (exemplified by MiniMax) versus the "infrastructure path" (chosen by Zhipu). The former risks being judged harshly by internet-era metrics once growth slows, while the latter risks failing if technological breakthroughs stall. Tang Jie's letter is thus a calculated move to secure Zhipu's identity as an AGI contender, buying time before the inevitable market demand for commercial proof. The core question remains: can Zhipu's "mo gao" (reach high) plan achieve genuine technological leaps fast enough to outpace the market's diminishing patience for stories over substance?

marsbitHá 44m

Zhipu, Afraid of Becoming the Next MiniMax

marsbitHá 44m

Trading

Spot
活动图片