2025-12-26 08:25:47

A certain emerging project's stablecoin recently experienced de-pegging in the secondary market. The cause was a large withdrawal of liquidity, followed by an official injection of liquidity to stop the bleeding, bringing the price back to around $0.9989.

It seems the problem has been resolved, but this is only superficial. The official claims to support 1:1 redemption, but in reality, this option is only available to primary market participants. Most ordinary users cannot enjoy this benefit and can only rely on luck in the secondary market. In other words, when de-pegging occurs, retail investors have almost no hedging options—either cut losses or hold on in hopes of a rebound.

This reflects a structural issue in stablecoin design: the asymmetry between liquidity and redemption mechanisms directly translates into risk disparities among different investors. For secondary market participants lacking channels, the losses caused by de-pegging are often unavoidable.

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

20 Likes

Reward
20
7
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

TopEscapeArtist

· 4h ago

It's a typical pump-and-dump game. That price of 0.9989 clearly indicates a stop-loss level. The MACD has already crossed bearish, yet they're still hyping a rebound. Another stablecoin that cuts my gains. First-tier and second-tier treatments are different; retail investors are always the last to know. That's why I say de-pegging is a dangerous signal. The technicals don't support it.

View OriginalReply0

WenAirdrop

· 4h ago

Same old trick again, the primary market is making a fortune, while retail investors are completely wiped out. --- Is it just about de-pegging stablecoins? Wake up, the officials have long left a backdoor for primary accounts. --- Once you see through it, the redemption mechanism is designed for big players; our secondary market is just here to take their money. --- Taking out liquidity and then injecting it back in—who isn’t aware of the emotional toll of this move... --- So there are still people trusting these new project stablecoins? I really don’t dare to move. --- Price "recovery" to 0.9989 is nothing; can retail investors recover their losses? --- Information asymmetry is playing out; big players have redemption rights, and we only have the right to cut losses.

View OriginalReply0

DataPickledFish

· 4h ago

It's the same old trick again, the privileges of the primary market laid bare once more. Retail investors are only fit to eat the leftovers from the secondary market; it's high time to see through this. That's why I run whenever I see new stablecoins—there are too many hidden pitfalls. Officially injecting liquidity? Who are they fooling? It's all just a show. Had I known earlier, I wouldn't touch tokens from such projects—either cut losses or get trapped; there's no third way.

View OriginalReply0

IronHeadMiner

· 4h ago

Here we go again with the same trick, the primary market dads have already run away --- The de-pegging of stablecoins is basically a new way to cut leeks --- $0.9989? Wake up, brother, retail investors have no redemption channels at all --- The official liquidity stop-loss, retail investors still have to find their own band-aids --- This is outrageous, why can the primary market redeem 1:1, while we suffer huge losses in the secondary market --- Structural problems? I think it's structural deception --- Another "support 1:1 redemption" lie, thanks for the reminder --- Liquidity is drained and then injected again, tired of this storytelling routine

View OriginalReply0

GasBankrupter

· 4h ago

Here we go again, only the primary market can redeem 1:1? Isn't this just exploiting retail investors? --- Even after solving the de-pegging issue, it's still at 0.9989. That's really outrageous, it hasn't been resolved at all. --- It's always like this. The officials say nice things, but in reality only insiders profit, while we get sacrificed in the secondary market. --- I've seen through it long ago. De-pegging of stablecoins is just a trick by big players to manipulate retail investors. --- Damn, this logic—saying 1:1 redemption but retail investors can't actually use it? How is this still called a stablecoin? --- It's another scheme to cut the leeks. The liquidity mechanism is just a facade. --- So ordinary people can only accept it. The risk is all on us.

View OriginalReply0

ChainPoet

· 4h ago

It's the same old trick again. The primary market people have already run away, and it's really pointless for us to buy in the secondary market. The treatment difference between primary and secondary markets is so huge. Saying 1:1 redemption is just fooling people. If it de-pegs, you still have to cut losses. How can stablecoins be stable? This is the current state of Web3. No matter how beautiful the mechanism design is, it's just a way to scam retail investors. Why do people still believe in official stop-loss measures? It's never really over. Design flaws are ultimately paid for by the secondary market. I just want to know who designed this. Instead of worrying about de-pegging, better ask when the funds will run again. Watching the price rise back up but being unable to sell at all—this feeling is truly despairing.

View OriginalReply0

GasDevourer

· 5h ago

Here comes the retail investor slaughter again, a classic first-tier market moat tactic. Only large investors have access to the redemption channel—this move is truly brilliant. --- $0.9989？Still fooling ourselves, the de-pegging issue hasn't been truly resolved. --- That's why I never touch new project stablecoins; it's just too risky to put all the weight on retail investors. --- According to this logic, the officials aren't really worried about de-pegging; after all, they don't suffer the losses. Truly clever. --- Liquidity withdrawal, official injections, price "recovery"—I'm tired of this routine. --- What can retail investors do? Just pray for a rebound or go all-in to cut losses—that's just a multiple-choice question. --- 1:1 redemption is just a show for small investors like us; isn't this just outright grass-cutting? --- Why is it always like this? The mechanism itself is inherently unequal, no wonder de-pegging has become the norm. --- It seems most new stablecoins follow this pattern: hype first, then cut, just the same old story.

View OriginalReply0