From Hyperliquid to Solana: How an ICO Promise of 'Chain Switching' Shakes Investor Trust?

比推Publicado em 2026-01-19Última atualização em 2026-01-19

Resumo

In a controversial move, the digital collectibles platform Trove announced its sudden migration from Hyperliquid to Solana on January 19, citing a liquidity partner’s decision to liquidate a significant HYPE position. This shift contradicts earlier ICO promises that emphasized Hyperliquid integration and HYPE token backing, triggering backlash from investors who now demand refunds. The ICO, which initially raised over $11.5 million, faced scrutiny after the team briefly prolonged the fundraising period, causing speculative spikes on prediction market Polymarket. Investigations revealed that Trove had transferred $45,000 from its angel round directly into prediction markets, and allegations emerged that the team offered paid promotions to influencers. Community trust eroded further as Trove proceeded with token generation and distribution plans without addressing refund requests, despite the fundamental change in platform and tokenomics. The incident highlights risks in crypto investing, especially around anonymous teams, opaque fund management, and unilateral post-ICO changes.

Author: Sanqing, Foresight News

Original Title: Trove Raises Tens of Millions Then 'Switcheroo', Suspected of Misusing Funds and Manipulating Prediction Markets

On January 19, unwise, a team member of the digital collectibles contract platform Trove, tweeted that Trove would migrate to Solana. The member stated that this was because the liquidity partner supporting its Hyperliquid path chose to liquidate its 500,000 HYPE position. Subsequently, the HYPE purchase address disclosed on its ICO page began selling.

unwise's tweet (top), Trove-associated address HYPE transaction record (bottom) | Source: X (top, translated), HypurrScan (bottom)

Previously, Trove repeatedly mentioned that it had raised $20 million, would launch a token on Hyperliquid, and would build its digital collectibles contract platform based on HIP-3. Based on this public information, it completed an ICO with a $20 million FDV, selling 12.5% of the total supply.

ICO Flip-Flopping, Transferring Raised Funds to Prediction Markets

The Trove ICO was originally scheduled to start on January 9 at 1:00 and end on January 12 at 1:00.

On January 12, the project team announced it had raised over $11.5 million and extended the ICO by 5 days until January 16 at 1:00. 42 minutes later, they posted again revoking this decision and stated the ICO would end as originally scheduled.

Affected by this, the probabilities on Polymarket for the Trove ICO total raising over 15M, 20M, 25M, and 30M all sharply increased from near zero to 40% – 80% within a short time.

On January 17, on-chain detective ZachXBT tweeted that Trove had directly moved $45,000 from its Trove angel round financing into prediction markets on January 11. Trove team member unwise replied, attributing the operation to TJR (an English crypto KOL).

Source: ZachXBT and uniwise tweets (translated)

Furthermore, according to crypto KOL hrithik, they received multiple messages from the Trove team promising additional compensation for promoting their ICO bids and posts.

Source: hrithik tweet (translated)

Community feedback on the ICO changes and Polymarket activities included criticism that the extension decision increased uncertainty and damaged trust.

Source: xero tweet (translated)

Regarding Polymarket, users accused the team of manipulation and non-disclosure, turning a previously promising ICO into demands for refunds, with some calling it insider trading, leading to a shift in sentiment from excitement to caution.

Source: Maran tweet (translated)

Violating ICO Public Information, Temporarily Migrating to Solana

Previously, Trove repeatedly stated on its official Twitter that it had purchased HYPE tokens, would build its digital collectibles contract platform based on HIP-3, and had launched a test website.

Source: TROVE tweet (translated)

During its ICO, it did not make any changes to this related information.

Trove related information | Source: Trove ICO page (translated)

The community strongly opposed the migration to Solana, viewing the shift as a deviation from the initial Hyperliquid promise. Some participants demanded full refunds, stating it no longer aligned with the investment logic.

Source: unwise (left) and Trove official Twitter reply (right), translated

Source: Wazz tweet (translated)

As of now, Trove has not responded to related refund requests. It stated that TGE will occur on January 20 at 00:00, followed by ICO token distribution and oversubscription refunds.

Source: Trove official Twitter (translated)

The Boundary Between ICO Promises and Investor Protection

The changes in Trove's actual execution have deviated from the core path, technical dependencies, and liquidity promises publicly during the ICO. These are major substantive changes, not mere technical optimizations or iterations.

Source: Trove ICO page (translated)

This behavior of诱导 (inducing) first and switching later changes the essence of the investment target; the initial investment logic should be invalidated. Investors'诉求 (demands) for refunds to protect their rights should receive broad support.

The crypto investment environment is highly speculative and uncertain. Participants must carefully review project whitepapers, on-chain fund flows, team track records, etc., before deciding, and specifically evaluate the project team's communication transparency, timeliness, and compensation mechanisms for any major changes.

Investors need to be especially vigilant towards project parties with non-public team information, high anonymity, or those with delayed communication after changes.

Twitter:https://twitter.com/BitpushNewsCN

Bitpush TG Discussion Group:https://t.me/BitPushCommunity

Bitpush TG Subscription: https://t.me/bitpush

Original link:https://www.bitpush.news/articles/7604143

Perguntas relacionadas

QWhat was the main reason given by the Trove team for migrating from Hyperliquid to Solana?

AThe Trove team member unwise stated that the migration was due to their liquidity partner liquidating its 500,000 HYPE position, which was a key support for their Hyperliquid path.

QHow much funding did Trove claim to have raised during its ICO, and what percentage of the total token supply was sold?

ATrove claimed to have raised $20 million at a $200 million fully diluted valuation (FDV) and sold 12.5% of the total token supply in its ICO.

QWhat controversial action did Trove take regarding the ICO timeline, and how did it affect the Polymarket prediction market?

ATrove initially extended the ICO by 5 days on January 12 but reversed the decision 42 minutes later. This caused short-term spikes in probabilities on Polymarket for various fundraising milestones (15M, 20M, 25M, 30M) from near zero to 40-80%.

QWhat allegation did ZachXBT make about Trove's use of funds, and how did the team respond?

AZachXBT alleged that Trove transferred $45,000 from its angel funding round directly into a prediction market on January 11. The Trove team member unwise responded by attributing the action to TJR, an English crypto KOL.

QHow did the community react to Trove's decision to migrate to Solana, and what did many investors demand?

AThe community strongly opposed the migration, viewing it as a deviation from the initial Hyperliquid promise. Many investors demanded full refunds, arguing that the investment logic was no longer valid.

Leituras Relacionadas

The Changing Landscape: What Are Crypto VCs Experiencing?

Title: The Shifting Landscape of Crypto Venture Capital The era of dedicated crypto venture capital funds is undergoing a significant transformation. Once essential for navigating the sector's complexity and high risk, these specialized funds are now facing an identity crisis as the market matures. This shift mirrors historical patterns in other specialized investment classes like cleantech and SPACs, where initial information advantages dissipate as technologies become mainstream and integrated into existing industry frameworks. The article argues that crypto is reaching a critical inflection point, transitioning from a "building phase" to an "integration phase." Major players like Stripe, BlackRock, and Visa now engage with crypto not for its novel mechanics but as a foundational financial infrastructure. Their needs—regulatory compliance, banking partnerships, distribution channels—align with traditional fintech, a domain easily understood by large, generalist funds like Sequoia and Founders Fund. This evolution creates a "barbell effect" within the VC landscape. On one end are massive, diversified platforms that can incorporate crypto as one vertical among many. On the other are small, nimble funds focused on niche, experimental projects. The middle ground—medium-sized dedicated crypto funds—is being squeezed out. Their typical fund size makes it impossible to generate sufficient returns solely from early-stage crypto bets, yet they cannot compete with giants for later-stage deals. Consequently, leading crypto-native firms like Paradigm and Framework Ventures are expanding into AI, robotics, and other sectors, driven partly by LP pressure for better returns amid a broader VC DPI crisis. Others, like Dragonfly and a16z, have narrowed their crypto focus predominantly to financial infrastructure like stablecoins, reframing the sector's core narrative. For crypto entrepreneurs, this consolidation presents challenges. While generalist funds offer larger checks and broader resources, crypto projects now compete fiercely with AI for attention and capital within these firms. Furthermore, the long-term, non-commercial foundational work that built the ecosystem—funded by dedicated crypto VCs—is less likely to attract generalist capital focused on direct returns. The conclusion is that "crypto investor" as a standalone category is becoming obsolete, akin to "internet investor." Crypto is becoming a baseline infrastructure layer. The future will see a barbell structure: large-scale growth financing handled by generalist funds, while pioneering, speculative projects are funded by small, specialized vehicles. The dedicated crypto funds of the 2017-2021 boom, which incubated core infrastructure, are giving way to this new, bifurcated reality.

Foresight NewsHá 15m

The Changing Landscape: What Are Crypto VCs Experiencing?

Foresight NewsHá 15m

As Consensus Accelerates, What Are Young Investors Betting On?

Title: As Consensus Forms Faster, What Are Young Investors Betting On? In the rapid evolution of tech investment, a new generation of young investors is navigating a landscape where AI, robotics, commercial aerospace, and quantum computing are advancing simultaneously. Traditional investment logic based on financial models is giving way to a need for deep technical understanding and the ability to act before industry consensus forms. An analysis of trends from the "WAIC FUTURE TECH" list of young investment leaders reveals key shifts in focus. The first major trend is the movement of AI from the digital screen into the physical world. Investment is shifting from large language models and chatbots towards embodied AI, robotics, AI hardware, and edge computing. While demonstrations generate excitement, the real challenge lies in achieving scalable, reliable, and cost-effective delivery in complex real-world environments like factories and logistics. Success depends not just on algorithms but on the integration of sensors, actuators, and control systems. Second, the competitive focus for large models is moving beyond raw capability toward building an "intelligence flywheel." The goal is to create self-reinforcing systems where user interaction generates data, improving the model, which in turn enhances the user experience and attracts more engagement. Companies that successfully embed AI into workflows to create these closed-loop systems can build lasting value that isn't easily erased by the next model upgrade. Third, facing a potential bottleneck in high-quality human-generated data, investors are looking at new underlying technologies. Reinforcement learning and self-play, as demonstrated by AlphaGo Zero, offer paths for AI to generate its own experience. Scientific foundation models, which aim to build general AI capabilities for fields like life sciences and materials discovery, represent a non-consensus direction that could unlock new frontiers of knowledge and data. Finally, in deep-tech areas like quantum computing, commercial aerospace, and space-based infrastructure, patient capital is essential. These fields have long, uncertain development and validation cycles involving complex engineering, supply chains, and regulations. Investment here requires a long-term view, focusing on foundational team capabilities and the eventual emergence of market demand, even if commercial returns are distant. Collectively, these trends illustrate how young investors are adapting to a new era. They are learning to make earlier, technically-informed judgments, balance hype with real-world viability, and provide the patient capital needed to build the deep-tech foundations of the future.

marsbitHá 43m

As Consensus Accelerates, What Are Young Investors Betting On?

marsbitHá 43m

Unlocking $100 Million in Liquidity? Pump.fun's New Policy Tests the 5-Minute Pump Technique

Foresight News, July 21 – Pump.fun has launched its new "BOOST" mode as the standard launch mechanism for new tokens. The core of BOOST is to address the issue of "dead liquidity." Historically, when a token migrates from its bonding curve to a liquidity pool, roughly 20% of its liquidity becomes permanently locked and unusable, a problem the platform estimates costs over $100 million annually. The new mechanism redirects this 20% of funds, which would have been locked, to instead be used for a 5-minute Time-Weighted Average Price (TWAP) buyback of the token immediately after migration. The purchased tokens are then permanently burned. For example, this means reserving 17.6 SOL for SOL pairs or about $2516 for USDC pairs at migration. This creates a short-term buying pressure and reduces the token's supply. The goal is to improve the immediate post-launch performance of memecoins, potentially increasing trader retention and transaction volume on the platform. However, critics warn this could lower the bar for token launches, encouraging low-quality projects, and that the brief 5-minute buy pressure might lead to sharper price crashes once it ends if followed by large sell-offs.

Foresight NewsHá 52m

Unlocking $100 Million in Liquidity? Pump.fun's New Policy Tests the 5-Minute Pump Technique

Foresight NewsHá 52m

What Signals Can Be Read from the Trading Data of India's Largest Asset Manager SBI's IPO?

India's largest asset manager, SBI Funds Management, successfully listed on July 21 with a nearly $10 billion IPO, attracting approximately 42 times subscription. However, the first-day closing price rose only about 6.3%, falling short of the 16% premium anticipated in the grey market. This signals robust demand for core Indian financial assets but also disciplined pricing, indicating the IPO market is selectively open for strong brands with clear growth narratives. The low reported underwriting fees, which led some global banks to reduce participation, highlight a shift in pricing power towards powerful issuers like SBI. Its strong brand, banking parent, and stable cash flows reduced reliance on traditional investment banking sales channels, with local brokers playing a larger role. This fee dynamic may not be replicable for weaker issuers. SBI's performance is seen as a key test for India's IPO pipeline, including potential future large listings like Reliance Jio and NSE. Its success with tempered gains sets a new price anchor: high-quality assets can launch, but excessive valuation premiums are constrained. The true measure of a sustained market reopening will be whether subsequent major offerings can proceed smoothly at reasonable valuations.

marsbitHá 1h

What Signals Can Be Read from the Trading Data of India's Largest Asset Manager SBI's IPO?

marsbitHá 1h

Can Japan Buy Growth with AI? Will the Bond Market Believe It?

Japan's cabinet has introduced the 2026 Basic Policy on Economic and Fiscal Management and Reform, shifting its primary fiscal target. The new framework moves away from the traditional annual primary balance goal and instead prioritizes a stable reduction of the debt-to-GDP ratio. This change is tied to a strategy of increased "responsible proactive fiscal" spending, aiming to boost long-term growth through investments in strategic sectors like AI, semiconductors, energy, and robotics. The government estimates total public and private investment in 62 key technologies could exceed 370 trillion yen by 2040. The market reaction has been mixed and cautious. While equity markets may respond to policy signals, bond markets are focused on fiscal credibility. Concerns center on whether the weakening of the clear primary balance anchor could lead to looser fiscal discipline. If investors doubt that these strategic investments will generate sufficient productivity gains, tax revenue, and nominal growth to outpace rising interest costs, they may demand higher yields on Japanese Government Bonds (JGBs). Recent volatility in the yen and JGB yields, with the 10-year yield briefly reaching 2.9%, reflects this skepticism. The success of this new framework hinges on two factors: whether Japan can achieve a nominal growth rate consistently higher than its long-term interest rates, and whether future budgets demonstrate disciplined control over bond issuance. The government's narrative is that strategic investment is essential to break Japan's cycle of low growth, aging, and labor shortages. However, the bond market will continuously assess the credibility of this plan, pricing the risk that it may represent fiscal expansion rather than a viable growth strategy.

marsbitHá 1h

Can Japan Buy Growth with AI? Will the Bond Market Believe It?

marsbitHá 1h

Trading

Spot
活动图片

Categorias popularesright-arrow

Etiquetas Popularesright-arrow