The launch of Edel Finance’s EDEL token, aimed at connecting tokenized stocks and real-world assets (RWAs) to decentralized lending, has been shadowed by allegations of whale manipulation. Blockchain analytics firm Bubblemaps claims a coordinated group of wallets rapidly acquired a significant portion of the token supply immediately after launch. This raises concerns about fairness and the project’s intended token distribution.
Bubblemaps alleges that a cluster of approximately 160 wallets collectively amassed 30% of the EDEL token supply – valued at $11 million – immediately following the token’s launch. The firm suggests these wallets were linked and strategically funded just before trading commenced. This practice, known as “sniping,” involves deploying bots to quickly acquire tokens at the earliest opportunity.
Bubblemaps further alleges that the list of these 100 secondary wallets was directly embedded in the token contract creation code. They argue this establishes a “clear link between the team and the snipers,” suggesting potential insider involvement.
Refuting the Allegations
James Sherborne, co-founder of Edel Finance, has refuted the allegations. He stated that the team intended to acquire 60% of the token supply and subsequently lock it into vesting contracts, as outlined in the project’s documentation. This acquisition, according to Sherborne, was part of their planned tokenomics, not a malicious snipe.
Sherborne’s Explanation
“Cool chart – but not accurate…we actually acquired ~60% of supply and placed the tokens into a vesting contract, as per the docs,” Sherborne posted on X in response to Bubblemaps.
Bubblemaps’ Rebuttal
Bubblemaps has dismissed this explanation as a “Hayden Davis defense,” referencing a controversial figure in the memecoin space known for similar justifications after facing criticism. They argue that if the team’s intentions were genuine, the supply should have been allocated upfront based on the published tokenomics, which only allocated 12.7% of the supply to the team with a 36-month vesting schedule.
Conflicting Interpretations
The core of the disagreement lies in the interpretation of Edel Finance’s tokenomics. While Sherborne claims the 60% acquisition was for vesting, Bubblemaps points out that the 50% of the EDEL supply allocated to the vesting schedule originated from the token deployer and is unrelated to the alleged snipe.
Market Performance
Currently, EDEL has a market capitalization of around $14.9 million, but its value has decreased by 62% in the past week, according to CoinMarketCap. This volatility adds fuel to the fire, as investors are understandably sensitive to any potential market manipulation.
The Edel Finance situation serves as a stark reminder of the challenges facing new crypto projects. Establishing trust and transparency are paramount, and accusations of market manipulation can be incredibly damaging, regardless of their veracity. Whether Edel Finance can successfully address these concerns and restore investor confidence remains to be seen, but the episode highlights the ongoing need for robust on-chain analytics and greater accountability in the decentralized finance space. The incident also highlights the double edged sword of transparency that blockchain technology offers; While transactions are publicly visible, interpreting the data and assigning intent remains a complex challenge.
