Unveiling the Early Experiences of a Well-known Memecoin Platform and Its Mysterious Founder

A global leading Memecoin factory platform allows anyone to create their own cryptocurrency. However, years before the platform was launched, a person who shares the same name as the co-founder had already made a fortune by issuing and selling his own tokens.

According to the investigation, a person with the same name issued eight tokens in 2017. At that time, the platform's co-founder was only 16 years old. Two of the tokens gained attention on crypto forums, but then their prices plummeted, and investors accused the developers of conducting a Rug Pull.

According to an analysis by a blockchain security company, this developer, who shares the same name, earned as much as $75,000 in cryptocurrency in 2017 solely from the sale of two tokens — based on today's coin prices, that portion of assets may be worth up to $400,000.

"After waiting for market share and price increases, they quickly cashed out. " said the Chief Security Officer of a certain security company, "We strongly suspect that one of the tokens was designed by the developers as a tool for a Rug Pull."

The existence of the platform, according to its co-founders, is to protect investors from unethical actors by standardizing the token issuance process. However, there is evidence that this co-founder was an early developer of the kind that the platform aimed to guard against.

As of the time of publication, the platform and its co-founders have not responded to multiple requests for comments.

The Rise of the Platform and the Mysterious Founder

The platform was founded in January 2024 by three entrepreneurs in their twenties. The platform quickly became the preferred incubation and trading place for Memecoin.

This type of cryptocurrency is highly volatile and mainly born for speculation. According to third-party statistics, in just 15 months, the platform has generated over $600 million through a 1% trading commission.

The three co-founders rarely disclose their identities, locations, or company structure. One of them stated in an interview last year that this anonymity is for "personal safety" concerns, to prevent the enormous encrypted assets managed by the platform from attracting ransom or attacks.

Among the three, the public information regarding one of them is the most scarce. Aside from being listed as a director in the documents of the UK Companies House, he has virtually no public association with the platform. The other co-founder has stated that he is responsible for leading the development team in writing the platform's code and functionality iterations. Aside from one social media account, his online footprint is almost nonexistent.

However, a series of "digital clues" left in corners of the internet like GitHub, YouTube, LinkedIn, and Medium still associate this name with the suspected Rug Pull operation of early tokens.

Digital Footprint: Tracing Early Token Promotion

In 2017, the two tokens were initially promoted by two accounts on a crypto forum: DOMAINBROKER and ninjagod, both belonging to the same user. According to a forum message, after the DOMAINBROKER account was "suspected to be hacked," the user began communicating with investors using the ninjagod identity.

In a promotional post, DOMAINBROKER provided an email address containing the name of the co-founder, referring to it as "personal email"; while in another thread initiated by ninjagod, several forum users directly referred to the co-founder as the developer of the project.

Meanwhile, multiple clues indicate that the co-founder was in the same region of the UK as the early token developers.

Public records show that the co-founder was still registered at an address in a certain area of the UK at least in 2024. When a reporter visited the address, a resident who responded via intercom refused to disclose their identity but stated that the co-founder "no longer lives here," indirectly confirming the accuracy of the registration.

The company registration documents show that a subsidiary of the platform was registered at the same property located in the same area. This address is also shared by two other companies, both of which list a 62-year-old individual as a director. Furthermore, this individual is also registered as a voter at this address.

Aliases and Associations: The Use of Different Surnames

The co-founder appears to have used another surname as an alias, which is the same as that of the 62-year-old mentioned above, suggesting that the two may be related.

Until recently, a GitHub account using a specific nickname still retained an old code repository, which included a Gmail account named after that alias; the avatar used for that email also appeared on a Medium account registered in the name of that co-founder, as well as on LinkedIn and YouTube accounts registered under that alias.

The aforementioned YouTube account uploaded a video about a certain cryptocurrency. Although the project was created by someone else, its project logo also appeared in the forum account of ninjagod, which can be seen as indirect evidence that both are from the same person.

Another YouTube account registered under the name of this co-founder had posted videos about the "Equis" project, which promotes the slogan "Revolutionizing the gambling industry." Equis was also promoted by ninjagod on the forum, and its code is identical to the earlier two tokens. (The project did not generate investor interest on the forum.)

In summary, the two names used by the co-founder can both be traced back to relevant accounts that promoted early tokens on the forum.

ICO Bubble and Early Rug Pull Models

These early tokens were all launched during the peak of the ICO craze. During that time, hundreds of token projects raised billions of dollars from investors through the ICO model. ICOs became popular among crypto startups because they did not require equity dilution.

Conducting an ICO typically involves a three-step process: deploying a contract on the Ethereum network to mint tokens, articulating the project vision on the official website, and raising investments externally. A certain expert stated: "Many projects are just a white paper plus a website with a countdown timer—very low barrier to entry."

Analysts point out that while some projects funded through ICOs (such as Ethereum) are still operational, most ICOs are manipulated, exaggerated, or even completely fraudulent, ultimately leading to tightened regulations. Many developers exaggerate the use of their projects, manipulate prices to create hype, and even fabricate return rates.

"Developers aggressively promote the fantasy of high returns," said a research analyst, "this is precisely the source of the FOMO mentality."

The frenzy of the ICO craze has led many gullible investors to conduct almost no due diligence in their pursuit of profits, a phenomenon that is strikingly similar to today's behavior of investing in questionable meme coins. "There are many similarities between the meme craze and ICOs," the analyst pointed out, "it's very easy to sell a story to the public and then quickly reap the rewards."

The Boom and Bust of a Certain Early Token

A developer began promoting its most popular token in early October 2017.

The developer continued the previous standard script: minting tokens on Ethereum, building a website, and promoting on forums, social media, and messaging apps. To generate hype, they distributed tokens for free through so-called "airdrops" and promised to release a white paper. At that time, the white paper was seen as a symbol of legitimacy and could drive up prices.

An analyst pointed out: "The release of the white paper can greatly enhance attractiveness. Even just the promise to release it is enough to stir market sentiment."

The screenshots of the project that have circulated on messaging software reveal how it promotes itself to potential investors. The page claims: "We are committed to making the transition from fiat currency to cryptocurrency as smooth as possible while maintaining integrity and a high-end atmosphere." At the bottom of the page, there is also an image of a bank card that claims to be usable for physical consumption.

A form obtained from the investigation shows that hundreds of people have registered to participate in the airdrop of this token within just a few days. Meanwhile, discussions are lively on the forum. One user wrote: "Let's spread the word and get more people to notice this outstanding token." As of October 19, the market capitalization of this token has risen to about $1.3 million.

But just as early investors were filled with expectations, the developers began to secretly sell off.

An analysis by a security company shows that developers distribute millions of tokens to wallets under their control a few days after the token creation. One of these wallets was subsequently used to sell a large amount of tokens to the market.

Between October 19 and 21, the wallet sold hundreds of batches of tokens on a peer-to-peer trading platform. These sales coincided with a catastrophic drop in the asset's price, which fell by 87.9%.

Panic started to spread on messaging apps and forums. One user, probably trying to find some amusement, began to jokingly refer to the token as "ECRASH." Others accused the developers of being fully responsible. Another user who participated in the airdrop stated: "Everyone is very angry." "I think this is my first time experiencing a Rug Pull."

The highly anticipated white paper has never appeared, and in the end, the developer disappeared from forum posts and communication groups. Just a few days ago, he wrote: "I can assure everyone that the project is making significant progress."

In three transactions on October 20 and 21, the developer's wallet withdrew a total of 240 Ethereum (ETH) from the trading platform, which was approximately $75,000 at the time. After each withdrawal, these ETH were immediately transferred to another wallet address, and then dispersed into three wallets. Ultimately, these ETH were transferred to multiple centralized exchange accounts—these platforms are typically used to convert cryptocurrencies into fiat currency.

The investigation has identified at least 20 wallets used by the developer, which were used to issue, airdrop, or sell early tokens, or to transfer related income to centralized platforms.

"The effect of this layered processing is to obscure the flow of funds," said a certain analyst, "If you have nothing to hide, there is actually no need to do this. This in itself is quite suspicious."

Despite some investors still harboring fantasies about its return—on October 24, someone jokingly said, "I smell the scent of the white paper"—all signs have long indicated the final outcome.

In a forum post at the beginning of October, a developer wrote: "This will be like a Pump and Dump, a round of price increase followed by selling off, early investors can recover their costs." "I'm sorry to say it so directly, but that's the fact."

Faster than creating wealth is forgetting.

As of today, the frenzy of the platform has not yet stopped. According to third-party statistics, its daily revenue reaches as high as 1 million dollars. The wealth of the founders has skyrocketed, far surpassing the early projects of that time. While this "wealth creation machine" continues to operate, the contrary intention of Rug Pull is still being played out, with almost no one paying attention.

In November last year, a teenager started a live broadcast on the platform, creating and selling a token in just a few minutes, netting $30,000. He shouted "Holy fuck! Holy fuck!" while giving the camera the finger—this moment may truly be a footnote of this era.

![Unveiling Pump.Fun and its mysterious founder, early on