Former New York City Mayor Denies Profit, Faces Backlash: NYC Token Plummets 81%, On-Chain Evidence Points to Suspicious Liquidity Manipulation

New York former mayor Eric Adams, after experiencing a sharp decline in his launched Meme coin NYC Token, issued a statement through a spokesperson denying any profit from it. However, this clarification contradicts on-chain data: on one hand, Adams claims he did not move any investor funds; on the other hand, blockchain analysis platforms have tracked suspicious liquidity operations related to the project. This incident has become another example of chaos in the Meme coin market.

NYC Token’s 48-Hour Magical Journey

From Times Square to Price Collapse

On January 13, Adams held a press conference in Times Square, announcing the launch of NYC Token, claiming the goal was to raise funds to combat anti-Semitism and anti-American sentiments, and to promote children’s blockchain education. The project was subsequently launched on the Solana network.

According to the latest reports, the performance of NYC Token can be described as a “rollercoaster”:

It took only a few hours from launch to crash. This extreme price fluctuation immediately raised market suspicions of a “Rug Pull” (project team withdrawing funds and running away).

On-Chain Evidence Reveals Suspicious Behavior

Bubblemaps analysis uncovered key details: wallets associated with the project deployer withdrew about $2.5 million USDC from the liquidity pool at the high point. Although the address later injected about $1.5 million, roughly $900,000 remained unrecovered. This “pumping” behavior is a typical Rug Pull characteristic.

More ironically, a wallet suspected to belong to an insider made a purchase 10 minutes before Adams’ official announcement, ultimately losing $477,000. This indicates that even insiders with prior knowledge could not escape losses, instead exposing information asymmetry about the project.

The Gap Between Adams’ Statement and On-Chain Facts

Core points of the statement

Adams emphasized three points through his spokesperson:

• He did not profit from the NYC Token launch
• He did not move any investor funds
• Reports about his transferring funds are “false information”

This statement attempts to distance himself from the project’s failure. Adams even said he currently would not take a salary from the project but reserved the right to reassess in the future.

But on-chain data tells a different story

While it cannot be directly proven that Adams himself operated these liquidity extractions, the following facts are undeniable:

• Addresses associated with the project deployer indeed conducted large-scale liquidity operations
• These operations occurred at price peaks, with precise timing
• Some funds were not returned, resulting in actual capital loss

The project’s official website claims to be a “community” cryptocurrency, but it has no official connection with the New York City government. This means Adams, as the public face of the project, cannot fully dissociate himself.

Market Implications of This Event

Systemic Risks in Meme Coin Markets

The NYC Token case once again exposes core issues in the Meme coin market: liquidity can be easily manipulated, and project teams can extract large sums from high prices within hours. Unlike traditional scams, these operations often operate in legal gray areas.

Controversy Over Politicians’ Involvement

During his tenure, Adams was a strong supporter of cryptocurrencies, but this token launch reveals another side of political figures’ involvement in crypto: fame can quickly boost coin prices, but it also means that once a project fails, trust collapses immediately.

New York City’s new mayor Zohran Mamdani has stated he will not purchase the token, reflecting widespread skepticism in the market about this project.

Possible Future Developments

Based on current information, several directions are worth关注:

• Whether there will be formal regulatory investigations or judicial interventions
• Whether NYC Token investors will take collective action
• Adams’ further response to on-chain suspicious activities
• The impact of this incident on other policymakers’ involvement in crypto projects

Summary

Adams’ denial statement versus on-chain evidence highlights fundamental issues in the Meme coin market: lack of transparency, information asymmetry, and difficulty in tracing fund flows. Even statements from public figures are hard to counteract the permanent records on the blockchain.

The true significance of this event is not whether Adams profited but that it exposes how easily Meme coin markets can be manipulated. For investors, this serves as a clear warning: no matter how prominent the project team’s identity, funds are never fully guaranteed. On-chain data is always more convincing than words.