You are reading The Third Angle. The publication is mostly about crypto and economics, my areas of expertise, but could also be about many other things such as geopolitics, science, AI, and health: all areas I love as well.
The Third Angle is run by Juan Aranovich, an economist from Argentina, managing editor of Unchained, researcher at Ryze Labs, and crypto enthusiast.
This week, the MANTA Network team rolled out an airdrop that, let's just say, didn't quite make a splash in the way many had hoped. As someone who was eagerly farming the airdrop myself, I can relate to the disappointment - ending up with a whopping 7 MANTA tokens, valued at around $15. But what truly baffled me was the reaction from the community.
But wait, Juan, what the hell are airdrops? In the crypto world, airdrops are like unexpected gifts of new tokens, directly deposited into the digital wallets of users, usually for free. They're a strategy used by blockchain projects to promote their new tokens, akin to getting free samples at a store. Now, here's where being an early bird gets interesting: If you're an early adopter or supporter of a project, your chances of receiving these airdrops are usually higher. It's a common practice to reward those who have been with the project since its infancy. This is exactly what happened with the MANTA Network airdrop. By distributing tokens to early supporters, projects like MANTA aim to not only reward those initial believers but also encourage ongoing engagement and investment. It’s a way of saying 'thanks for being with us from the start' and fostering a loyal community. So, in essence, airdrops serve as both a promotional tool and a reward mechanism, especially for those who hop onto the bandwagon early in the game.
The backlash against the MANTA team was swift and fierce. It seems that many felt they were owed something substantial, as if large airdrops were a given right rather than a bonus. It's a fascinating, and somewhat troubling, mindset that appears to be taking root in certain corners of the crypto world.
I mean, take a look at this:
Let's get something straight: airdrops are inherently unpredictable. They're not guaranteed, nor should they be expected as a significant windfall every time. Yet, some people, self-described 'airdrop farmers,' seem to think that crypto projects owe them something substantial. This entitlement mentality is perplexing and speaks volumes about the shifting culture in the crypto community.
This whole scenario also brings to light a broader issue: the role of points and airdrops in crypto projects. Not every project needs to dangle the carrot of airdrops to build a community or boost engagement. Yes, the introduction of points systems in the Solana network, for instance, has significantly increased Total Value Locked (TVL) in recent months – and trust me, I'm farming a fair share of those airdrops myself. But relying too heavily on this strategy can backfire.
Airdrops and points can create an initial buzz, sure. But if the underlying project lacks substance or doesn’t meet a genuine market need, no amount of free tokens will build long-term loyalty. Teams need to be cautious about setting expectations too high. Overhyping an airdrop can lead to a backlash if the reality doesn’t match the frenzy. Btw, there’s a great Unchained podcast on this topic.
The bottom line is this: loyalty in crypto should be driven by product-market fit, not by the lure of free tokens. A successful project is one that offers real value, innovation, and utility, not just periodic token handouts. As the dust settles on the MANTA airdrop episode, it's a reminder for both developers and users to focus on the fundamental aspects of a project, rather than getting caught up in the fleeting thrill of 'airdrop hunting'. After all, substance is what will stand the test of time, not just the promise of freebies.