In the field of Crypto Assets, there is a prominent IP project that has long faced extremely low Liquidity issues, raising many questions in the market about its operational model. The trading of the project's Token exhibits highly centralized characteristics, seeming more like transfers between internal accounts rather than genuine market transactions.

Previously, the project team promised a fully transparent buyback plan. However, when a buyback scale of $300 million was announced, the coin price surged by 30%, raising questions about the authenticity of the actual buy orders. This approach is not only contradictory but also made the project team hesitant to disclose the specific amount of buyback funds in the future.

What is even more concerning is that this IP public chain seems to lack substantial sources of income. So, what is supporting the continuous operation of this low liquidity but high market value Token? There are voices in the market suggesting that this may be maintained through high control over the supply, essentially a form of harvesting retail investors.

Many investors are starting to compare it to some failed projects in the past, such as Luna, Move, and OM. They are concerned that when the euphoria ends, this project may face the risk of collapse.

The incident has also sparked widespread concerns about cryptocurrency projects in South Korea. Some investors say they will be more cautious about projects from the region, arguing that they lack a long-term development pattern.

Overall, this case serves as a reminder for Crypto Assets investors to remain vigilant, carefully assess the actual value and sustainability of projects, rather than being misled by short-term market manipulations.