15.06.2025 16:05
On June 15th, the cryptocurrency market witnessed a dramatic downturn as Polyhedra Network's ZKJ token plummeted by almost 60% within a single hour. This catastrophic event erased over $360 million from its market capitalization, highlighting significant vulnerabilities within the project's liquidity management. The sudden and severe price drop was not an isolated incident; the governance token of 48 Club DAO, KOGE, concurrently experienced a 50% decline, resulting in over $100 million in market cap losses.
The initial trigger for this chain reaction was the depletion of the KOGE/USDT liquidity pool. This liquidity crisis left investors stranded, unable to convert their KOGE tokens, sparking widespread panic selling. Community reports quickly surfaced, alleging a failure by the KOGE team to replenish the USDT reserves in their liquidity pool. This triggered a cascading effect described by some users as a "rug pull from both sides," a term used to describe a situation where developers deceptively remove liquidity from a project.
As KOGE holders desperately sought to exit their positions, they flooded the ZKJ/USDT pool. While the ZKJ team initially attempted to maintain liquidity, the sheer volume of incoming KOGE overwhelmed the system. This influx caused the ZKJ/USDT pair to collapse, creating a domino effect that decimated ZKJ's price and severely eroded investor confidence. Analysis from sources like CoinGecko revealed the extent of the price crash. Further exacerbating the situation, according to online commentary from sources like Twitter, concerns around a significant ZKJ token unlock and low RSI readings fuelled the sell-off.
The fallout from this event extended beyond the immediate price drops. Members of the 48 Club DAO expressed their fury, accusing the team of gross negligence and mismanagement. Social media platforms became inundated with calls for accountability, with the phrase "rugged from both sides" rapidly gaining traction within the crypto community. The incident significantly damaged the reputation and trust in both the Polyhedra Network and 48 Club DAO ecosystems, raising serious questions about the long-term viability and stability of their chosen liquidity strategies. While some argued that the actions taken were within the bounds of the project's terms, the consequences clearly demonstrated the inherent risks associated with decentralized finance.
