megaETH, a real-time blockchain focused on improving Ethereum performance, announced today that it will launch a new Non-Fungible Token (NFT) series: The Fluffle.
The NFT series has a total supply of 10,000, with a whitelist price of 1 ETH, and is a non-transferable and non-tradable Soulbound Token (SBT). NFT holders will enjoy a 5% token airdrop, with 50% unlocked on the TGE day and the remaining 50% linearly unlocked over 6 months.
The whitelist details have not yet been announced, but users can currently check on the official website to see if they have whitelist eligibility.
megaETH is one of the popular Ethereum scaling solutions this round. On June 27, 2024, it completed a $20 million seed round, receiving funding from institutions and personalities such as Dragonfly, Robot Ventures, Folius Ventures, and Vitalik Buterin. In December 2024, it also raised $10 million in a community round on the Echo platform in just 3 minutes, with a valuation already exceeding $200 million.
However, the NFT sale by megaETH has sparked intense controversy in the community. On the one hand, some players believe the sale has an excessively high return rate and are actively receiving whitelists in the secondary market. On the other hand, some players suspect that megaETH's move is a disguised Initial Coin Offering (ICO) and an attempt to harvest the community before the bull market ends. So who is more justified?
This article outlines the arguments from both sides for readers' reference, and does not constitute any investment advice.
Affirmative: Reasonable Valuation, Worth Participating
Undoubtedly, the highlight of megaETH's The Fluffle NFT series is the future 5% token airdrop, so the community generally sees it as a "shell selling" activity. If the sale is successful, the project party will obtain 10,000 ETH, currently worth about $27 million (if ETH does not continue to fall), and the token's Fully Diluted Valuation (FDV) would be $540 million based on the 5% airdrop ratio.
Adding the previous $30 million in funding, megaETH's total funding has reached $57 million. Calculated at the general token valuation of 20 times the funding amount, megaETH's FDV would also be $114 million.
Whether it's the $540 million FDV calculated based on the NFT pricing or the $114 million FDV estimated based on the funding, the community players supporting megaETH believe the valuation is still within a reasonable range and has the potential for at least 10 times the return. After all, compared to the previous popular Ethereum scaling solutions, such as TEG's FDV (Zksync $4.2 billion, Starknet $19.5 billion, Blast $2.7 billion), megaETH's current FDV is indeed not high, and is even lower than Starknet's current circulating market value of $660 million.
ABCDE Venture co-founder BMAN wrote in support of megaETH: "They could have raised more funds, but they refused a $1 billion VC offer and chose to use the retro ICO method to give more tokens to the community. I believe this is an attractive opportunity for liquid capital, and it is also one of the most asymmetric opportunities recently. As an investor, I am glad to see Ethereum return to the simple, retro ICO era."
The team member enzoblue of the NFT project CyberKongz even made a bold statement, saying that if anyone doesn't want the whitelist, they can feel free to DM him.
Some community players have also seen through megaETH's "shell selling" motive. On the one hand, the use of SBT can avoid the speculation of NFTs in the secondary market; on the other hand, by clearly defining the NFT as a "collectible", they can reasonably avoid legal risks, while giving the community a private placement price that is not much different from VC. When facing community doubts, megaETH co-founder Pie also said directly: "We can't directly ICO the tokens to the community, we can only lower the valuation through this method and give it to the community in the form of NFTs, and whether people buy it or not depends on their own assessment of the project."
Opposing: Mainnet Unfinished, Premature Harvest
Of course, in this crypto world full of truth and falsehood, it's often not enough to just look at what the project party says to understand their true intentions. Therefore, some community players have also questioned megaETH, believing that in the current market environment, a $540 million valuation is still too high, and the project party is trying to harvest early by selling tokens before the mainnet is even launched, taking advantage of the abundant liquidity in the bull market.
In this cycle, the market is generally permeated with the phenomenon of project parties issuing tokens/listing as the endpoint, with many projects directly ceasing operations behind the scenes after profiting from token issuance, only hoping for their tokens to be unlocked as soon as possible. With this precedent, megaETH's disguised ICO happening before the mainnet launch, when the real product has not yet been delivered, raises concerns about whether the team will still have the motivation to continue development after the funds are in hand, and whether the product is worth the current valuation. After all, in the current imperfect regulatory environment, the highest constraint rule for Web3 projects is the moral standards of the project party themselves - is the priority Build or Money?
KOL Feng Mimi published a long article questioning megaETH's NFT sale, stating that megaETH is not truly concerned about the community experience. If they were, they should distribute tokens through fair mechanisms (such as game contributions, activity rewards, or even NFT staking), rather than just finding a reasonable excuse to directly sell tokens.
KOL Feng also expressed concern about megaETH's future airdrop ratio, as it has always been difficult for grinders to compete with whales. Compared to Monad, which is still focused on ecosystem building and valuing community activities, megaETH has obtained funds through an ICO and may no longer need CEX liquidity to exit, which may not be a good thing for the industry.
