AntEx Cryptocurrency Case: Who Really Holds the "Wallet Keys" and Has the Power to Decide the Token's Fate?

Investors ask: who really holds the "wallet key" and has the right to decide the fate of the token? This question really needs the intervention of the authorities to clarify.

The Vietnamese cryptocurrency market has been shaken in recent days by a scandal involving the AntEx cryptocurrency project (later Rabbit) and its related parties, including famous figures such as Mr. Nguyen Hoa Binh (Shark Binh).

Putting aside the back-and-forth arguments about who is the manipulator or who is the victim, this incident is a costly wake-up call, exposing the inherent risks that any investor participating in the crypto and fintech markets must face.

In reality, what is happening from the AntEx/Rabbit incident shows a huge gap in transparency in project governance, especially in projects backed by reputable funds or individuals.

The constant blaming and accusations of liquidity withdrawals and token dumping by stakeholders (investors, strategic advisors, technical teams) have eroded trust. Investors ask: who really holds the "wallet keys" and has the right to decide the fate of tokens?

In the DeFi environment, if the governance mechanism is not public and clear from the beginning, investors will face the risk of losing everything when conflicts arise between parties.

Lack of Independent Oversight Mechanism: The collapse of the project and the token devaluation of nearly 99% shows the absence of effective independent oversight and accountability mechanisms. The personal reputation of the investor or advisor is just the initial cover, not ensuring the sustainability of the project without a transparent and strictly audited governance structure.

The AntEx event is a typical example of the “dizzying” speed of collapse of a digital asset. Accordingly, the fact that the token lost almost all its value in a short time is a clear demonstration of the extremely high volatility of the crypto market, especially young projects. The reason given could be due to early investors taking profits or due to non-transparent behavior, but the end result is that liquidity is drained.

According to experts, the renaming and token conversion rate from AntEx to Rabbit is a way to erase previous negative trading history and price charts. This is a potentially risky tactic in the crypto industry, making it difficult for new investors to assess the project's history and actual risks. Investors should be extremely wary of projects that engage in this type of "refresh" behavior without reasonable explanation.

Many investors are attracted to AntEx because of the presence and large investment of a well-known figure. However, the personal reputation of an investor or advisor is not a guarantee of the quality or safety of a project. In the new financial sector, even top experts can make mistakes or be deceived.

The AntEx case is not just a “personal drama” but a test of the maturity of the Vietnamese fintech and crypto market. To protect their assets, investors cannot only rely on the law or transparency from relevant parties but need to proactively check public wallet addresses, evaluate the truly decentralized governance mechanism, and understand that any investment in digital assets can turn into zero in the blink of an eye.

Market maturity can only come when investors become more informed, and projects are forced to operate with the utmost transparency.

Source: https://daibieunhandan.vn/vu-tien-dien-tu-antex-ai-thuc-su-giu-chia-khoa-vi-va-co-quyen-quyet-dinh-van-menh-token-10388874.html