A recurring pattern in the crypto trenches: project launchers often piggyback on established names or themes, essentially branding their token as a derivative from day one. This immediately positions it as a knockoff, capping its market potential and severely limiting its upside.
Take the Maduro Memes phenomenon as a case study. Once that trend gained traction, countless builders rushed to launch variations with similar naming conventions. But here's the catch—by anchoring yourself to what came before, you're essentially admitting your project is an imitation, a weaker alternative. You're fighting an uphill battle against the original's momentum and credibility.
The smarter play? Launch with originality. Give your project its own identity rather than leaning on past successes. The market naturally gravitates toward innovation, not iterations.
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.
15 Likes
Reward
15
6
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
SmartContractPlumber
· 01-15 05:26
Honestly, this pattern is just like the permission control vulnerabilities discovered during audits — it has hidden risks embedded at the architectural level.
View OriginalReply0
CrossChainMessenger
· 01-13 01:24
To be honest, I've seen this trick too many times... Copycat projects with similar names just want to make easy money, but in the end, they end up being ground down by originality.
View OriginalReply0
NFTRegretful
· 01-12 20:01
To be honest, I've seen this kind of scheme too many times in the crypto world. Projects riding on hype really have no future.
View OriginalReply0
PumpStrategist
· 01-12 20:01
Chip distribution shows that following the trend is always the fate of the retail investors; chasing hot topics is less effective than analyzing the pattern...
View OriginalReply0
OnchainHolmes
· 01-12 20:01
To be honest, using trendy names as a gimmick really seals your own fate; posting original content behind the scenes is doomed to fail.
View OriginalReply0
SellLowExpert
· 01-12 19:44
Really, following the trend in naming is suicide. Before even launch, you've already lost half the battle. Investors with a bit of taste will just pass after a quick glance.
A recurring pattern in the crypto trenches: project launchers often piggyback on established names or themes, essentially branding their token as a derivative from day one. This immediately positions it as a knockoff, capping its market potential and severely limiting its upside.
Take the Maduro Memes phenomenon as a case study. Once that trend gained traction, countless builders rushed to launch variations with similar naming conventions. But here's the catch—by anchoring yourself to what came before, you're essentially admitting your project is an imitation, a weaker alternative. You're fighting an uphill battle against the original's momentum and credibility.
The smarter play? Launch with originality. Give your project its own identity rather than leaning on past successes. The market naturally gravitates toward innovation, not iterations.