Main Points:
- A class-action lawsuit accuses Meteora co-founder Benjamin Chow of orchestrating a coordinated fraud across at least 15 tokens, including memecoins tied to public figures.
- Tokens such as MELANIA (linked to Melania Trump) and LIBRA (linked to Javier Milei) are alleged to have been used to lend legitimacy to pump-and-dump schemes.
- On-chain analysis shows insiders tied to the “Trump team” received about $4.2 million in MET tokens in an airdrop, and immediately moved them to exchange wallets—triggering large-scale dumping and a crash.
- The launch of the MET token by Meteora saw a sharp drop in price (more than 40%) shortly after listing, reflecting the risk of launching or participating in such ecosystem tokens when whales may dominate distribution.
- For crypto investors searching for new assets and income opportunities, this case underscores the importance of due diligence: tokenomics transparency, distribution fairness, on-chain wallet behaviour, and celebrity endorsements should be treated with caution.
1. Legal Allegations: The Framework of the Lawsuit
The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, names Meteora, Benjamin Chow, and affiliated entities including Kelsier Ventures and its leadership (Hayden Davis & family) as defendants.
According to the complaint:
- The defendants developed the $M3M3 token (on the Solana blockchain via Meteora) and marketed it as a “memecoin investment with comparatively low risk”.
- The supply of the token was heavily concentrated (95 %) in the hands of insiders within 20 minutes of launch, enabling market manipulation and leaving ordinary investors vulnerable.
- The amended complaint alleges the same scheme expanded to include at least 15 tokens, including MELANIA and LIBRA, where celebrity or political figure names were used to lend perceived credibility.
- Although the public figures themselves (Melania Trump, Javier Milei) are not accused of wrongdoing, the lawsuit alleges they were used as “window-dressing” behind the scenes.
In summary: from a regulatory and auditing perspective, this case highlights a structure of alleged fraudulent token launches where celebrity branding and opaque controls enabled insiders to profit at the expense of ordinary participants.
2. On-Chain Data: Airdrop, Whale Behaviour, and Price Crash
On-chain investigators (notably Arkham Intelligence) flagged that three wallets associated with the “TRUMP meme-coin team” were among the top five recipients of the Meteora MET airdrop, receiving roughly $4.2 million in MET tokens.
Key observations:
- The three wallets received their MET allocations then transferred them to the exchange OKX, consistent with “cash-out” behaviour rather than long-term ecosystem participation.
- The airdrop distribution reportedly accounted for a large portion of the supply (e.g., MET supply ~1 billion tokens, ~48 % allocated to airdrop) and many retail recipients later saw value decline rapidly.
- Price performance: MET launched around ~$0.90, plunged to ~$0.51 within first day of trading (a drop of more than 40 %). Market capitalisation dropped to approximately $263 million.
- Further commentary suggests that such a large insider dump created downward price pressure, and retail investors were left exposed as liquidity drained.
For anyone assessing a new token launch, these data emphasise that large pre-allocation to insiders, rapid exchange transfers, and celebrity-linked airdrops may signal elevated risk of a pump-and-dump scenario.
3. What This Means for New‐Asset/Income Hunters
For readers seeking new crypto assets, income opportunities, or practical blockchain applications, several lessons emerge from the Meteora case:
3.1 Celebrity Branding ≠ Safety
The use of high-profile names, such as Melania Trump or Javier Milei, may generate hype and draw retail interest — but hype does not guarantee integrity. The lawsuit alleges these names were leveraged to give a veneer of legitimacy while underlying controls remained opaque. Thus, celebrity endorsements should not substitute for rigorous due-diligence.
3.2 Tokenomics & Distribution Matter
If a token’s distribution heavily favours insiders, or if airdrops skew to whales or exchange-connected wallets, there’s a higher likelihood of manipulation risk. In the MET case, nearly half the supply was claimed in the airdrop and major recipients immediately exited. Retail participants must assess token-supply schedules, vesting, and on-chain wallet flows.
3.3 On-Chain Behaviour is often the Canaries in the Coal Mine
In this case, on-chain analytics flagged the large exchange transfers very early. For new asset hunters, monitoring wallet flows, exchange deposits, and snapshot criteria of airdrops is a practical step to identify potential red flags (or opportunities). If key wallets dump to exchange shortly after launch, that can be a strong negative signal.
3.4 Ecosystem Activity ≠ Fundamental Utility
While the token launched on the Solana-based DEX Meteora (a genuine DeFi venue) and had advertised use-cases (e.g., staking, liquidity-provider rewards), the sudden price crash shows that ecosystem affiliation does not always translate into sustainable value. For income-seeking participants, evaluating real usage, TVL, trading volume, and retention (not just launch hype) remains essential.
3.5 Regulatory & Legal Risk Is Real
The fact that a U.S. class-action suit is underway indicates that even in relatively decentralised ecosystems, legal frameworks are catching up. For those developing, launching, or participating in assets, considering counterparty risk, disclosure practices, and legal exposure is more important than ever.
4. Practical Checklist for Blockchain/Token Launch Evaluation
Based on the above, here is a practical checklist when assessing next-gen crypto assets or income potentials:
- Token distribution transparency: Are allocations to insiders, exchanges, foundations clearly delineated and time-locked?
- Airdrop eligibility and flows: Who is receiving the airdrop? Are large addresses dumping immediately to exchanges?
- On-chain wallet monitoring: Are wallet transfers to exchanges happening right after token release? Are there large whale sells?
- Utility & ecosystem metrics: Is there genuine TVL, real-world usage, repeat transactions, rather than speculative hype?
- Celebrity or influencer involvement: Is celebrity branding backed by verifiable endorsement? Or used mainly for marketing?
- Legal/regulatory posture: Has the project disclosed token offering risks? Are U.S. or other global regulatory frameworks relevant?
- Community and governance: Is there decentralised governance, transparent roadmap, open code, external audit?
- Exchange listing behaviour: Are tokens immediately listed on major exchanges enabling dump? Was there a lock-up period?
For users seeking new income sources, applying this checklist helps filter for higher-quality assets and avoid projects where the odds of a pump-and-dump are elevated.
5. Conclusion
The Meteora-MET saga serves as a cautionary tale for participants in the crypto space hunting for the next asset, yield stream, or real-world blockchain application. The allure of celebrity endorsements, high-profile airdrops, and burgeoning DEX ecosystems is undeniable — but as this case shows, they can mask structures rife with risk: insider allocations, rapid sell-offs, and regulatory blowback.
If you are looking at new assets or seeking revenue through blockchain participation (staking, liquidity-provision, token launches), remember: hype is not a substitute for transparency. A rigorous approach — one rooted in tokenomics, on-chain analysis, and real ecosystem metrics — is essential. In the rapidly evolving landscape of ‘Asset-Backed Representation’ and ‘Autonomous Trust Tender’ (your ‘Two-Extremes Model’), protecting capital and aligning with projects that build real value (rather than simply screaming for attention) will separate long-term winners from hype-driven casualties.
