The truth about the Towns Airdrop: Millions of points exchanged for "small rewards", early community users unexpectedly became the biggest "supporters".

Original | Odaily Daily Report

Author | Asher

Last night, Towns, which was led by a16z Crypto and raised $46 million, finally launched its TGE and opened the airdrop for claiming (for a detailed introduction to the Towns project, you can check: Towns, which raised $46 million, is about to go live, is the airdrop likely to be "small毛"?). However, the major communities did not erupt in a celebration of "big毛" but were instead drowned in a wave of skepticism regarding the project team's airdrop mechanism:

• The number of points and airdrops is disproportionate, and the level of activity has nothing to do with the airdrops; big players lose money, real people lose money.
• After sticking to daily check-ins for several months, the final airdrop received was not as much as what was given by Binance Alpha.
• It’s hard to finally get the airdropped coins, but I have to stake them for 30 days to get an additional 50% of the coins. Do these coins also count as part of the airdrop? If none are staked, whose tokens are these?
• Persistently signing in yourself and entering different towns has determined that you are a witch. What are the standards for a witch's address?
• ……

Although the previous article objectively analyzed that the Towns airdrop was likely to be a "small amount," the actual airdrop results show that this Towns airdrop is not only a "small amount," but also treated many real users as witch addresses. Most importantly, although the airdrop was marked as nearly 10% of the total token supply, early users only accounted for 3%.

Analysis of the top ten addresses on the leaderboard: The most received only airdrops worth 6000 USD in tokens, and multiple front-row addresses did not qualify for airdrops.

According to on-chain data and in conjunction with the official airdrop query website (query address: the airdrop quantity for the top ten addresses on the Towns leaderboard is as follows:

• Rank one address: 0x447eac5102d70715ab39b3ed1a094bbac1fd06d5, points quantity 15,302,605, airdrop token quantity is 14,312 pieces;
• Rank 2 Address: 0xed4440c79c68dcf945c3fc1fcf2f8b1e3940e34c, Points Quantity 10,282,204, Airdrop Token Quantity is 31,464 pieces;
• Rank Three Address: 0x410c87a00bb79f069754e03606769ee8ce3da6f8, Points Quantity: 8,020,211, Airdrop Token Quantity: 26,771 pieces;
• Ranking Four Address: 0xa350e08ca97a79f95394047f94681f4cb689da86, Points Quantity 7,866,452, Airdrop Token Quantity is 150,000 pieces;
• Ranking Five Address: 0x88f0e561558bc55edb4e0f7a0d31b8608d6b0adb, Points Quantity 6,500,000, no airdrop eligibility;
• Rank Six Address: 0x200f5b01ae0c635a8e2a9357e93415620db4bfe6, Points Quantity 6,360,000, no airdrop eligibility;
• Ranking Seven Address: 0x250fcf1b03f6d79bfbbc5177b775d5a8ddd771ae, Points Quantity 6,140,000, no airdrop eligibility;
• Ranking address: 0x7647c0887fe0060e3c7c0d17cc1877237d133621, points amount 5,500,000, no airdrop eligibility;
• Ranking Nine Address: 0xfda6396cc3c528ded4aa09c5a0ec531e88bdc857, Points Quantity 5,500,000, no airdrop eligibility;
• Ranking address: 0x3d4eb29af62aa1ef193d4d520fcca4ddecd8bc09, points quantity 3,177,896, airdrop token quantity is 4,226.

From this set of data, the results are astonishing: addresses ranked from 5th to 9th in the leaderboard, despite holding millions of points, do not even qualify for airdrops and are directly treated as "witch addresses" by the project team. What is even more shocking is that the address with the most points, the "top brother" on the leaderboard, has accumulated over 15 million points, but ultimately only exchanged for less than 15,000 TOWNS tokens, which, based on current prices, is worth less than $600. It's simply a case of "earning points to exhaustion, but still losing money from airdrops."

However, the address that received the most airdrops in the top ten leaderboard only got about 150,000 tokens, with a market price of around 6,000 USD. This seems okay? But don't forget, to achieve such a high score, it can be reasonably determined that the user has joined a large number of paid towns. If you calculate the costs one by one, not to mention not making a profit, it's very likely that they haven't even recouped their investment.

In short, from the top one to the top ten, with millions to tens of millions of points, the airdrops received are mostly meager, and many users didn't receive a single token at all. This raises the question: who actually received the TOWNS tokens? If the front-row users have all become "pacing runners", where are the real airdrop winners hiding? To which addresses did the large amounts of tokens ultimately flow?

In the 10% airdrop share, early users only account for 3%.

According to feedback from the "撸毛" KOL Bing Frog and several experienced users, Towns officially announced that among the 9.8% airdrop share allocated to the community, about 3% was distributed to community points users; Binance Holder users received approximately 3%; the Binance Alpha program is estimated to account for 1% to 2%; the remaining portion is likely allocated to activities hosted by other centralized exchanges, such as Bybit.

Although the officials verbally emphasize that airdrops value the community, in practice, more tokens are allocated to exchanges and their related activities.

The number of airdrops for old users who insist on community building and daily check-ins is less than that of CEX users.

According to multiple community builders deeply involved in the construction of Towns, they spent months continuously producing content, inviting newcomers, and persisting in daily sign-ins in the towns they created, but ultimately received less than 1000 tokens in airdrop rewards, which is even less than the 1359 tokens received by users who had never interacted with Towns before but only met the Binance Alpha conditions.

This comparison not only neglects the contributions of individuals but also exposes the airdrop mechanism's disregard for the value of "real users." Community members spent months participating in the construction, bringing genuine user data, revenue, and market promotion to the project, yet the airdrop shares they received were even less than those of CEX users who had never heard of the project until yesterday.

A recent emerging trend is that, in order to launch more centralized exchanges during the TGE, many project teams actually treat real community users as "electronic beggars" while treating exchange users as "honored guests." It is important to note that the latter, even if they receive a lot of airdrops, mostly sell off as soon as the market opens; while the community users who are willing to participate early and stay long-term are the ones who will continue to use the protocol after the TGE and fundamentally create ongoing revenue for the project.

If the community cannot benefit, how long can the "decentralized narrative" of Web 3 projects really last?