Former New York City Mayor Eric Adams publicly promoted the token, which is now tokenized as NYC tokenswhich describes it as a project geared toward combating anti-Semitism and promoting blockchain education, including remarks made during a rollout in Times Square.
Shortly after trading began, the worth of the token soared after which fell sharply. Multiple branches reported a drop of around 80% in a brief window, with the crash coinciding with suspicious liquidity activity reported by on-chain analysts.
The key message: “Liquidity removed at peak” and three.18 million USDC
The specific number in your prompt, 3.18 million USDCcomes from an on-chain alert shared by Lookonchain and repeated by several crypto news aggregators. These posts claim that liquidity was withdrawn just before the height and that this move triggered panic selling.
Separately, Bubblemaps posted a thread describing “suspicious LP activity,” including a wallet allegedly linked to the deployer that was creating one-sided liquidity on Meteora, removing a considerable amount of USDC near the highest, and later adding some USDC back after the worth fell.
Since the numbers vary from tracker to tracker, that is best represented as follows:
- Verified: Multiple independent on-chain evaluation sources reported unusually large USDC liquidity moves on the time of the crash.
- Not fully verified: The exact total varies depending on the source, and public reporting doesn’t establish that Eric Adams personally controlled the wallet(s) in query.
What is verified and what continues to be unproven?
Confirmed by mainstream reporting
- Adams publicly promoted and unveiled the token as “NYC Token.”
- The token experienced a rapid rise and a precipitous fall, with widespread coverage describing a drop of around 80% shortly after launch.
- On-chain analysts (particularly Bubblemaps) reported a pattern consistent with liquidity manipulation or extraction, including USDC being removed near the highest and only partially returning later.
Still unproven or controversial
- That Eric Adams personally “withdrew liquidity.” Most reporting attributes the activity to wallets “attached to the provider” or “related to the launch,” reasonably than Adams’ direct custody.
- The exact USDC amount. Lookonchains 3.18 million USDC The number is usually repeated while other reports give attention to a $2.4 million is $2.5 million Distance and coarse $1.5 million added back later so it stays around $1 million not taken into consideration on this order.
The damage claim from the dealer “Dr6s2o”.
The claim that dealers Dr6s2o lost about $473.5k (um -63.5%) in lower than 20 minutes appears on the identical Lookonchain-based reporting stream and is repeated by outlets summarizing this post.
What may be said with certainty is that rapid liquidity changes and sharp price movements created a rapid-loss environment by which traders who bought late when liquidity was low were exposed to sharp slips and losses.
Response from Token Team
After the criticism spread, the NYC Token team released an announcement saying that partners had “rebalanced liquidity” as a consequence of demand, citing the repatriation of funds and the deployment of TWAP-related measures. Several media outlets quoted and disseminated this statement.
This answer alone doesn’t answer the query of how liquidity was managed, who controlled the wallets, or why withdrawals occurred at peak times.
What this story means for traders
Even without definitive attribution, the incident is a transparent case study in the danger of memecoin adoption:
- Liquidity may be thin and highly concentrated.
- Unilateral LP and sudden liquidity changes can turn normal volatility into an exit trap.
- When price discovery occurs on a DEX, execution quality can immediately deteriorate as TVL drops.
Practical risk filters that many traders use for launches like this:
- Check whether liquidity is locked, how LP is distributed and whether the deployer wallet is identifiable.
- Treat political or celebrity branding as marketing, not due diligence.
- Understand that if liquidity disappears, you might not have the option to exit on the displayed price.
Here's the best way to check an important facts yourself in five minutes
If you should independently confirm the important thing messages without counting on screenshots:
- Identify the proper token contract from an official source after which compare it with a good explorer equivalent to Solscan.
- Look on the pool and liquidity events on a market site, e.g DEXScreener or a pool evaluation page for the venue used.
- Confirm that USDC inflows and outflows occur around peak time. Trackers may mark this in another way depending on whether or not they are aggregating multiple pools or counting partial distances.
- Compare what was highlighted in Bubblemaps with what’s claimed within the Lookonchain alert and note where the transaction sets differ.
Diploma
It is true that Eric Adams promoted the NYC token and that the token crashed shortly after its launch. It can also be true that reputable on-chain analysts have pointed to large USDC liquidity moves that appear to be an extraction or aggressive rebalancing. What is just not proven in public reporting is that Adams personally controlled the wallets that drained liquidity, and even the precise USDC total value varies depending on the tracker. Until there’s clearer wallet attribution, essentially the most accurate wording is “allegations of liquidity withdrawals related to wallets related to the provider,” reasonably than a confirmed personal act by Adams.
The post “Eric Adams NYC Token: What’s Verified About the Liquidity Pull Claims and Trader Losses” appeared first on Crypto Adventure.
