营销的黑暗面：如何使用贷款期权模型地剥夺加密货币项目

这是一个项目向做市商提供代币的贷款，后者然后使用它们来创造流动性，提高价格稳定性并帮助在加密货币交易所确保列表。

A common offering from market makers is the "loan option model," where a project lends tokens to the market maker, who then uses them to create liquidity, improve price stability and help secure listings at a cryptocurrency exchange. In exchange, the market maker promises to return the tokens at a higher price within a year if they aren't able to get them listed on the agreed-upon exchange.

做市商的一个普遍产品是“贷​​款期权模型”，一个项目向做市商提供代币，后者随后使用它们来创造流动性，提高价格稳定性并帮助在加密货币交易所获得列表。作为交换，做市商承诺，如果他们无法将其列入商定的交易所，则将在一年内以更高的价格返回代币。

While this model is often framed as a win-win scenario — with the market maker providing liquidity and trading activity to support the token price and the project offering a lower-cost capital solution — in reality, it has been a death sentence for many young projects.

尽管该模型通常被构成双赢情景 - 市政机构提供流动性和交易活动来支持代币价格，而该项目提供了低成本的资本解决方案，但实际上，这是许多年轻项目的死刑。

"How it works is that market makers essentially loan tokens from a project at a certain price. In exchange for those tokens, they essentially promise to get them on big exchanges. If they don't, then within a year, they repay them back at a higher price," said Ariel Givner, founder of Givner Law.

“营销商的工作原理基本上是以一定的价格向项目贷款。作为换取这些代币，他们本质上承诺将在大型交易所进行。如果他们不这样做，那么一年之内，他们以较高的价格偿还了它们，”吉夫纳·劳（Givner Law）的创始人阿里尔·吉夫纳（Ariel Givner）说。

"If they do get the tokens listed, then they're able to keep the tokens and sell them back to the project at a higher price than what they paid for them."

“如果他们确实列出了代币，那么他们就可以保留令牌并以比他们支付的价格更高的价格将其出售给项目。”

But behind the scenes, a number of market makers are using the controversial token loan structure to enrich themselves at the expense of the very projects they're meant to support. These deals, often framed as low-risk and high-reward, can crater token prices and leave fledgling crypto teams scrambling to recover.

但是在幕后，许多做市商正在利用有争议的令牌贷款结构来丰富自己，而牺牲了他们要支持的项目。这些交易通常以低风险和高级奖励而定，可以遍布代币的价格，并使刚起步的加密团队争先恐后地恢复。

"I haven't seen any token really benefit from these market makers. I'm sure there are ethical ones, but the bigger ones I've seen just destroy charts," Givner said.

吉夫纳说：“我还没有看到这些做市商真正受益。我敢肯定有道德的，但我所看到的较大的做市商只是摧毁了图表。”

The market maker playbook

做市商剧本

Firms like DWF Labs and Wintermute are some of the best-known market makers in the industry. Past governance proposals and contracts viewed by Cointelegraph suggest that both firms proposed the loan option model as part of their offerings — though Wintermute's proposals call them "liquidity provision" services.

DWF Labs和Wintermute等公司是业内最著名的做市商。 Cointelegraph观看的过去的治理建议和合同表明，两家公司都提出了贷款期权模型作为其产品的一部分 - 尽管Wintermute的建议称其为“流动性提供”服务。

DWF Labs said that it doesn't rely on selling loaned assets to fund positions, as its balance sheet sufficiently supports its operations and liquidity needs across exchanges without relying on liquidation risk.

DWF实验室表示，它不依赖出售借贷资产来资助职位，因为其资产负债表足够支持其在交易所的运营和流动性需求而不依赖清算风险。

"Selling loaned tokens upfront can damage a project's liquidity — especially for small- to mid-cap tokens — and we're not in the business of weakening ecosystems we invest in," said Andrei Grachev, managing partner of DWF Labs, in a written response to Cointelegraph's inquiry.

DWF Labs的执行合伙人安德烈·格拉切夫（Andrei Grachev）表示：“出售租借的代币可能会损害项目的流动性，尤其是对于中小型股份代币的流动性，而且我们并不是在削弱我们投资的生态系统的业务。”

While DWF Labs emphasizes its commitment to ecosystem growth, some onchain analysts and industry observers have raised concerns about the firm's trading practices.

尽管DWF实验室强调了其对生态系统增长的承诺，但一些Onchain分析师和行业观察家对公司的交易实践提出了担忧。

Wintermute did not respond to Cointelegraph's request for comment. But in a February X post, Wintermute CEO Evgeny Gaevoy shared some of the company's operations with the community. He bluntly stated that Wintermute is not a charity but in the "business of making money by trading."

Wintermute没有回应Cointelegraph的置评请求。但是在2月X个帖子中，温特穆特首席执行官Evgeny Gaevoy与社区分享了该公司的一些业务。他直言不讳地说，温特穆特不是一个慈善机构，而是“通过交易赚钱的业务”。

What happens after the market maker gets the tokens?

做市商获得令牌后会发生什么？

Jelle Buth, co-founder of market maker Enflux, said that the loan option model isn't unique to the well-known market makers like DWF and Wintermute, and there are other parties offering such "predatory deals."

做市商ENFLUX的联合创始人Jelle Buth表示，贷款期权模式并不是DWF和Wintermute等知名做市商所独有的，还有其他政党提供此类“掠夺性交易”。

"I call it information arbitrage, where the market maker very clearly understands the pros and cons of the deals but is able to put it such that it's a benefit. What they say is, 'It's a free market maker; you don't have to put up the capital as a project; we provide the capital; we provide the market-making services,'" Buth said.

“我称其为信息套利，做市商非常清楚地了解交易的优缺点，但能够说这是一个好处。他们说的是，'这是一个自由做市商；您不必将资本作为一个项目；我们提供资金；我们提供市场制定服务；我们提供市场制定服务，” Buth说。

On the other end, many projects don't fully understand the downsides of the loan option deals and often learn the latter part of the agreement, he added. Buth advises projects to measure whether loaning out their tokens would result in quality liquidity, which is measured by orders on the book and clearly outlined in the key performance indicators (KPIs) before committing to such deals. In many loan option deals, KPIs are often missing or vague when mentioned.

他补充说，另一方面，许多项目并不完全了解贷款期权交易的弊端，并且经常学习协议的后半部分。 Buth建议项目衡量借出代币是否会导致质量流动性，这是通过书籍上的订单来衡量的，并在致力于此类交易之前在关键绩效指标（KPI）中清楚概述。在许多贷款期权交易中，提到KPI通常会缺少或模糊。

Cointelegraph reviewed the token performance of several projects that signed loan option deals with market makers, including some that worked with multiple firms at once. The outcome was the same in those examples: The projects were left worse off than when they started.

Cointelegraph审查了几个项目的代币绩效，这些项目与做市商签署了贷款期权，其中包括与多家公司合作的一些项目。这些示例中的结果是相同的：这些项目比开始时要差。

"We've worked with projects that were screwed over after the loan model," said Kristiyan Slavev, co-founder of Web3 accelerator Delta3.

Web3 Accelerator Delta3的联合创始人Kristiyan Slavev说：“我们已经与贷款模式后的项目合作。”

"It's exactly the same pattern. They give tokens, then they're dumped. That's pretty much what happens."

“这是完全相同的模式。他们给予令牌，然后被抛弃。这几乎是发生的事情。”

Not all market-maker deals end in disaster

并非所有市场营销交易都以灾难结束

The loan option model isn't inherently harmful and can even benefit larger projects, but poor structuring can quickly turn it predatory, according to Buth.

根据Buth的说法，贷款期权模型并不是固有的有害，甚至可以使大型项目受益，但是较差的结构可以迅速将其掠夺。

A listings adviser who spoke to Cointelegraph on the condition of anonymity underscored that the outcomes depend on how well a project manages its liquidity

与Cointelegraph有关匿名状况的列表顾问强调了结果取决于项目的流动性如何