Offizielles MASTR Logo MASTR
Menü
Beitrag lesen

Marktstruktur

Exchange accountability · 8 Feb 2026

If we want real change, token and coin teams must be the first to act. But they are the worst when it comes to hypocrisy.

Original auf X ↗

Die Originalbeiträge sind auf Englisch. Die Navigation ist in sieben Sprachen verfügbar.

01

Original auf X ↗

If we want real change, token and coin teams must be the first to act. But they are the worst when it comes to hypocrisy.

I know, I am once again that guy pissing in your front yard.

What many people do not understand is that pulling money out of CEXs is not enough. Not even close.

The real responsibility sits with the teams behind coins and tokens.

They are the ones who should have the decency to say no and refuse to list their projects on opaque, closed, intransparent exchanges.

And definitely stop pretending that a CEX listing is some kind of achievement worth celebrating.

The mindset in this market is completely broken.

Pure greed.

There is no honest argument left for why a token must be sold on a closed CEX other than chasing profits. Liquidity, exposure, growth, all of that is just a polished excuse. At the end of the day it is always the same reason. Money.

Projects preach decentralisation, censorship resistance, trustlessness, and then proudly hand their token over to the most centralised gatekeepers in the industry like it is a badge of honor.

It is intellectually dishonest and everyone knows it.

If teams actually cared about crypto values, they would build liquidity on chain, educate users, and accept slower growth instead of selling out for volume and quick gains. But that requires patience, principles, and long term thinking.

Greed is easier.

02

Original auf X ↗

If anyone is interested in my boring stuff, here is a selection of links on the topic for self study.

As long as token teams celebrate CEX listings as milestones, they are voluntarily handing price discovery, liquidity control, and user access to centralised intermediaries.

Pulling funds from CEXs is symbolic.

Refusing to build dependency on them in the first place is structural.

• Crypto markets have been shown to contain significant wash trading, where volume is artificially inflated and does not represent real demand. Some researchers found up to 80–95% of reported volume on unregulated exchanges may be fake or artificial.
➡️ https://t.co/3I4dIgci5k

• Wash trading is a known market manipulation tactic used to create the illusion of demand and higher activity, and is illegal in many jurisdictions.
➡️ https://t.co/qf9nvLlsfG

• Research shows centralized exchange infrastructure enables these practices because trades happen off chain and are reported without full transparency.
➡️ https://t.co/Cyo9737wJP

• Studies are actively ongoing into wash trading on major exchanges, examining why it occurs and how it can mislead investors and regulators.
➡️ https://t.co/JCIf93Mg48

🔺CEX vs DEX market structure

• Academic literature comparing centralized and decentralized exchanges notes that DEXs emphasise decentralisation, user control, and censorship resistance, whereas CEXs offer higher liquidity and advanced features but at the cost of central control.
➡️ https://t.co/JCIf93Mg48

• On chain data shows that DEX trading volume and liquidity are verifiable directly on the blockchain, contrasting with opaque reported volumes from CEXs.
➡️ https://t.co/WnGDir2Ik8

• Independent research finds that decentralized markets operate differently from centralised books, and that listing on a centralized exchange often shifts volume away from on chain markets.
➡️ https://t.co/Bk5VNjYY8r

🔺Market dynamics and decentralisation

• Transparent on chain trading preserves self custody and reduces counterparty risk compared to centralized exchanges.
➡️ https://t.co/WnGDir2Ik8

• Reports show that decentralized exchange volume has been a growing part of the overall market and can be more resistant to failures of centralized intermediaries.
➡️ https://t.co/WnGDir2Ik8

• CEXs remain dominant in trading volume but centralised custody and reporting structures invite regulatory capture and reduce decentralised market integrity.
➡️ https://t.co/JCIf93Mg48

Verwandte Recherchen

Marktstruktur

Rising prices, FOMO and retail losses

A long-form examination of FOMO, influencer narratives, speculative booms and the outcomes faced by retail traders.

Originalartikel27 min
MASTR

Unabhängige Recherche unterstützen

Die Untersuchungen, Originalbelege und Anleitungen hier sind frei zugänglich. Freiwillige Spenden finanzieren die Recherche mit und helfen, die MASTR-Tools weiterhin anzubieten.

Wallet öffnen