Emission Shock: TRUMP, MELANIA lose 86–99% as circulating supply doubles in three months

ambcryptoPublicado em 2025-12-10Última atualização em 2025-12-10

Resumo

New tokens like TRUMP and MELANIA have plummeted 86–99% in value as their circulating supply doubled within three months, according to Tokenomist data. The report highlights aggressive token emissions and expanding float as key factors causing severe price declines, despite initial hype. Examples include Layer (-99.7%), Melania (-98%), and GoPlus Security (-92%). Market liquidity has shifted toward major cryptocurrencies and real-world assets, leaving newer tokens vulnerable. Even projects with genuine utility, like GoPlus, suffered due to poor tokenomics. The analysis concludes that unsustainable emission schedules and weak supply control are primary drivers of post-launch price collapse.

Tokens launched in Q1, such as TRUMP and MELANIA, are facing extreme downside pressure despite early hype, according to fresh Tokenomist data. The data compared launch prices with current circulating supply and market performance.

In every case monitored, circulating float expanded aggressively while prices collapsed between 86% and 99% since launch.

Massive issuance, collapsing prices

The report highlights a steep increase in circulating supply across a group of newly launched assets, including Official Trump, Melania, Layer, Plume, GoPlus Security, and Bubblemaps.

In most cases, circulating float doubled within three months, placing continuous sell-pressure on secondary markets, causing emission shock.

For example:

  • Layer moved from 21% to 31% float and is down 99.7%
  • Melania expanded from 25% to 55% and is down 98%
  • GoPlus Security moved from 15% to 29% and is down 92%
  • Plume moved from 20% to 33% and is down 86%

While individual narratives differ, the market reaction follows a similar pattern: heavy token emissions combined with thin liquidity result in forced price discovery at sharply lower levels.

Liquidity concentration favors majors

The broad rotation into Bitcoin, Ethereum, and real-world asset tokens over recent months has left smaller new launches exposed to liquidity shortages.

With capital gravitating toward majors and RWAs, newer tokens have little structural demand to absorb new supply.

This pattern is typical in phases where liquidity becomes conservative and retail participation fades.

In such environments, emission schedules matter more than product fundamentals, and even genuine use cases may not be enough to protect a token from emission shock.

Surface-level demand isn’t enough

GoPlus Security stands out as a token linked to meaningful cybersecurity infrastructure, yet its price is still down over 92% from launch.

The data reinforces a consistent theme across past cycles: practical utility does not always translate to token value when tokenomics work against holders.

Market watchers attribute token design, vesting schedules, and aggressive post-launch float increases as the primary drivers of these drawdowns, rather than project quality alone.


Final Thoughts

  • Token design remains one of the strongest determinants of post-launch price behavior.
  • Until new projects prioritize sustainable emissions and tighter supply control, newly issued assets are likely to remain vulnerable to emission shock and long-term price suppression.

Leituras Relacionadas

Oracle Plunges 40%, Will Excessive AI Infrastructure Overbuild Drag Down Giants?

Oracle's stock has plummeted 40% from its September peak, despite securing over $500 billion in AI infrastructure orders, signaling that massive backlogs alone no longer assure investor confidence. Similarly, Broadcom, with a $73 billion AI order backlog, and CoreWeave, which recently landed $36 billion in deals with OpenAI and Meta, have also faced stock declines. The market is growing skeptical of the AI infrastructure boom, concerned not only about suppliers' ability to fund and deliver these projects but also about the financial health and commitment of their major clients—primarily tech giants like Meta, Alphabet, Microsoft, Amazon, Apple, and Nvidia, alongside AI startups like OpenAI and Anthropic. While giants have robust finances, they are increasingly relying on debt to fuel AI capex, with soaring expenditures on data centers straining cash reserves and free cash flow. For instance, Microsoft, Alphabet, and Amazon are projected to collectively invest $1 trillion over four years. However, AI still contributes minimally to their overall revenue, raising questions about the sustainability of using profits from core businesses to fund speculative AI expansions. Execution challenges—such as power grid limitations, cooling issues, and community opposition—further complicate timely deployment. The critical uncertainty remains: if exponential AI demand fails to materialize and monetize quickly enough, these vast investments could lead to underutilized infrastructure, massive losses, and a fundamental weakening of these tech titans. The race between AI infrastructure build-out and actual market payoff will determine whether this bet becomes a triumph or a disastrous overreach.

marsbitHá 47m

Oracle Plunges 40%, Will Excessive AI Infrastructure Overbuild Drag Down Giants?

marsbitHá 47m

Trading

Spot
Futuros
活动图片