<\/p>\n
We\u2019ve all witnessed it happen: a 10,000 supply PFP project comes out of nowhere and becomes the hot new thing seemingly overnight. Clad with flashy animated teasers and cryptic tweets, the social media accounts supporting these projects somehow find a way to attract hundreds of thousands of followers in record time, prompting those in the NFT space to turn on notifications lest they be left out of the loop.<\/p>\n
Yet, at this current stage of maturation<\/a> in the NFT space, we know that hyped NFT projects are never what they seem. When a hot new collection catches fire and sells out instantly, it often inevitably burns out just as fast, leaving a trail of FUD (fear, uncertainty, and doubt) in its wake. <\/p>\n While the intentions of those behind hyped collections may be pure, allow-list gatekeeping<\/a> and questionable social media tactics have ultimately soured the reputation of many a project. And while these types of projects are now few and far between, perhaps the only thing hyped NFT project use cases are good for in 2023 is to remind creators, collectors, and builders that max exposure isn\u2019t always a good thing.<\/p>\n Apart from cropping up out of nowhere and gaining steam quickly, there are a few other telltale signs that can be used to identify hyped NFT projects. In contrast with anticipated ecosystem expansions<\/a> from established (or at least well-known) brands in Web3, hyped NFT endeavors often: <\/p>\n But even if the development team has some clout on the blockchain, there\u2019s often nothing to account for the exponential growth experienced by many of these hyped mints. While it may be difficult to pinpoint or prove unethical growth tactics \u2014\u00a0like buying fake fans or using burner accounts to promote content \u2014some projects find it possible to accrue upwards of six figures in Twitter followers and Discord members within days. Of course, there\u2019s more to hyped mints than can be put in a box. To understand the whole picture, we can dissect examples of projects that have become somewhat of hype archetypes (i.e., cautionary tales<\/a>) for Web3.<\/p>\n In October 2021, Mekaverse<\/a> became one of the most anticipated PFP projects since the Bored Ape Yacht Club<\/a>. Considering the NFT space was at the tail end of the PFP summer<\/a> \u2014 a period where generative avatars<\/a> littered the NFT market \u2014 it felt as though every collector was hoping to win big by getting in early on the next big 10,000 supply collection. MekaVerse seemed to capitalize on their newly awarded attention big time by hosting raffles and giving out allowlist spots to their staunchest supporters.<\/p>\n Once the mint came and went, everything seemed to be on track. The project quickly crossed $60 million in secondary sales volume in less than 24 hours<\/a>, and even before the collection\u2019s 8,888 NFTs were revealed, the floor price for a single Meka had reached around 8 ETH (upwards of $25,000 at the time). But then came the first nail in the coffin, a potential insider trading fiasco that created a domino effect.<\/p>\n Soon after launch, numerous collectors and enthusiasts took to Twitter to accuse the MekaVerse drop of being rigged<\/a>. Highlighting figures from OpenSea, Etherscan, and other public databases, they created a picture that suggested the developers behind the project were somehow able to purchase some of the most rare Meka NFTs pre-reveal. A feat that shouldn\u2019t be possible unless the project\u2019s metadata was accessed by an outside source or deliberately changed by its originator.<\/p>\nThe anatomy of a hyped NFT<\/h2>\n
\n
Exhibit A: MekaVerse<\/h2>\n