Pantera Capital Refutes Investment in NFT Project Akio

TheCryptoTimes发布于2025-09-26更新于2025-09-26

Akio, a Non-Fungible Token (NFT) project, falsely announced on September 24 that it had raised a $5 million seed round led by Pantera Capital. The announcement, made on the social media platform X, was quickly and publicly denied by Pantera partner Franklin Bi, highlighting an issue of projects making unsubstantiated claims to generate interest. The incident is a warning of the importance of background checks on statements claimed in social media, by crypto projects.

A Funding Claim Unravels

The incident began when Akio published a graphic on its X account detailing a supposed $5 million seed round with Pantera Capital as the lead investor, along with Nvidia Ventures, Hasbro Ventures, AMD Ventures, and other players.

Shortly after the post went live, Franklin Bi of Pantera Capital issued a direct denial on X, stating, “Pantera is not an investor in this.”

Beyond Pantera, none of the other companies shown in the Akio post, Nvidia Ventures, Hasbro Ventures, AMD Ventures, Net Ease Global, SBI GRoup, SIG DTI, Susquehanna International Group Company, have publicly acknowledged any investment in Akio or the publication.

Instead of issuing a correction, the Akio project reportedly blocked Franklin Bi on the platform following his refutation of their announcement.

Legit Information 

The Akio incident offers a direct example of red flags and underscores that investors have to carefully review information, as well as the source of the announcement. Legitimate funding rounds are typically confirmed through official press releases or on the investors’ own channels, not just a social media graphic.

Investors can also verify claims with the alleged investors directly, such as: Pantera Capital’s official website reveals no mention of Akio in its portfolio. A lack of confirmation on a venture firm’s official blog, portfolio page, or social media can be a warning sign. 

A Playbook for Investor Due Diligence

The Akio incident serves as a real-time case study in the red flags that can surround fundraising announcements. For investors, it places a spotlight on the importance of verifying claims before making financial decisions. Here are key steps for due diligence:

  1. Trust Official Channels: Legitimate funding rounds are almost always announced via official press releases or are featured on the venture capital firm’s own website, blog, or verified social media accounts. An unverified graphic on a project’s own social media is not sufficient proof.
  2. Verify the Portfolio: Check the investor’s official website. Pantera Capital’s online portfolio, for example, contains no mention of Akio. A project’s absence from its alleged backer’s portfolio is a significant red flag.
  3. Seek Cross-Confirmation: Look for reporting from reputable, independent crypto news outlets that have verified the round with the parties involved.

Why false claims threaten investor trust

False claims damage the reputation of the project making them and force venture capital firms to publicly defend their credibility. Also, it contributes to an erosion of trust across the industry. Furthermore, false hype can be used to temporarily inflate the price of tokens or NFTs, leaving uninformed buyers at a loss when the claims are proven false. The Akio-Pantera is a reminder that in a largely unregulated space, claims should  be treated with skepticism. 

Also read: X Exposes Crypto Scam Bribery Network Amid Rising Fraud


Mobile Only Image

你可能也喜欢

伊利诺伊州0.2%加密货币税引发全面法律诉讼

伊利诺伊州一项针对数字资产交易征收0.2%税率的法案,正引发区块链协会和加密创新委员会等组织的全面法律诉讼。起诉方于8月21日向该州地方法院提起诉讼,要求宣布《数字资产税收法》无效并阻止其在2025年1月1日生效。 诉讼的核心争议在于该税的征收方式。与针对资本利得征税的传统方式不同,该法规定,当用户通过数字资产经纪商进行某些操作时,即使交易未产生利润,也需按资产价值缴纳0.2%的税。这意味着单纯的比特币转账、账户间移资或支付托管服务费都可能触发纳税义务,而股票交易、银行转账或实物资产托管却无类似税负。原告指控该税实质上是针对“存储或转移价值的机制”而非经济交易本身。 法案的模糊性带来更多问题。例如,一次加密货币购买可能涉及交易、入账和托管等多个环节,但法案未明确这算作一个还是多个应税事件。对于持续性的资产托管,是按年、按结算周期还是按余额变动来计税也未有界定,可能导致税单金额出现数量级差异。此外,“资产价值”的评估时点、如何准确判定用户身处伊利诺伊州等问题都规定不清,迫使经纪商依赖推测并承担巨大的合规风险及潜在刑事责任。 诉讼还挑战了法案的立法程序。该法案最初仅两页,后在未充分公众讨论的情况下,被扩充为涵盖多主题的1624页庞大议案,数字资产税收部分不足20页。原告认为这违反了州宪法程序,并指控该税歧视电子商务,违背了联邦《互联网税收自由法案》和商业条款。 目前,原告正寻求法院在明年1月法案生效前颁布禁令。此案将成为测试各州能否对数字资产金融活动单独征税的关键一役。

cryptonews.ru1小时前

伊利诺伊州0.2%加密货币税引发全面法律诉讼

cryptonews.ru1小时前

交易

现货
活动图片