2025-12-29 15:22:52

Looking back at 2024, the real issue wasn't what most people thought it was. Take a closer look at what actually happened with the token landscape that year.

Projects like pnut, fred, and shrub had plenty of beta versions running around—but that wasn't the core problem. Same story with moodeng and pesto; there were countless other betas floating through the market, and most just went to zero.

Even earlier in the year with myro and myra, the pattern was already there. The takeaway? This has been a consistent trend throughout 2024. The real culprit behind the failures wasn't what triggered the surface-level narrative—it was something much deeper about how these projects were structured and executed from the ground up.

PNUT1,05%

FRED0,5%

MOODENG0,18%

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.

10 Likes

Reward
10
7
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

YieldHunter

· 16h ago

ngl, if you look at the data... it's always the tokenomics that nobody wants to talk about lol

Reply0

gas_fee_therapy

· 12-29 15:51

Honestly, these meme coins have had issues for a long time. The structure has been poor from day one, so don't blame no one wanting them.

View OriginalReply0

SchroedingerAirdrop

· 12-29 15:50

To be honest, these meme coin projects have fundamental design flaws from the very beginning. Flooding with betas won't solve the core issues.

View OriginalReply0

SellTheBounce

· 12-29 15:44

Another year has passed, and you're still studying surface phenomena. These projects were doomed from the day they were designed; structural issues can't be fixed at all.

View OriginalReply0

DefiEngineerJack

· 12-29 15:39

nah fr, everyone obsessed with beta drama when the real issue is fundamentally about tokenomics design & execution layer incompetence. seen this pattern since myro dropped... most teams just copy-paste without understanding nash equilibrium implications tbh

Reply0

BugBountyHunter

· 12-29 15:37

To be honest, the reason these coins die isn't that complicated—it's just that the teams are inherently bad... What more structural issues need to be dug into? --- All those trash coins in 2024—no matter how nicely you talk about them, isn't it just the same old fundraising and running away routine? --- Be cautious when you see a flood of beta versions; can't you tell what's going on? --- Pnut, Moodeng, these things are basically just hype—once the hype is over, no one cares... talking about deep structural issues is just nonsense. --- It's the same story every year—new coins keep popping up, but in the end, it's just the money of retail investors flowing into certain pockets. --- Anyway, I don't believe in any "deep reasons"—it's just the project teams wanting to cut and run, nothing mysterious about it. --- After seeing so many coins die, the real underlying reason is just two words: scammers. --- When beta versions start running, you should know something's wrong; yet some people still wait around... serves them right. --- I haven't seen many projects in 2024 that can make it to the end of the year; no matter what they say, it's useless.

View OriginalReply0

GhostWalletSleuth

· 12-29 15:37

Basically, these projects have terrible architecture, and no matter how many betas there are, they can't be saved. --- Pnut, Moodeng, they look lively but are actually paper tigers. The problem isn't with the beta versions at all. --- This pattern will continue throughout 2024. No one really wants to solve the structural issues. --- Deeper execution capability flaws are more deadly than superficial popularity. --- Having more betas is pointless; the core issue is that these project teams haven't really figured out how to do it.

View OriginalReply0