Airdrops have become one of the most common ways for new crypto projects to gain attention, grow communities, and reward early supporters.
But I’ve noticed a trend a lot of these projects have massive sell pressure right after the airdrop claim period. Early holders dump their free tokens, and surely the price crashes, and the project struggles to recover.
Some people argue that airdrops are great for marketing and getting more users, while others believe they create a short-term hype bubble and hurt long-term value.
Me i would not say airdrops are killing new projects lately, but they can definitely hurt if they are not planned properly because lately someone in the basement of his mom will just wake up and decide to come with one shallow platform in the name of a project with utilities no proper planning or any form of future progress. the honest truth is most people who join airdrops are just looking for quick profits no matter how small at the end!! they don’t really care about the project itself to begin with, so once tokens are claimable!!! They instantly dump as fast as they can which now creates that heavy sell pressure and if the team has not built a strong tokenomics or utility behind the project, then the price collapse looks like the project is failing even before it gets a chance to grow.
Airdrops still have their benefits though. Because they are one of the fastest ways to put a project on the map!! to bring in users and build that necessary digital hype. I think the difference lies in how they are structured from the beginning. If it is just a free giveaway that is disguise in form of a projectect, then it attracts dumpers. But if rewards are tied to actual engagements like staking, governance or long even term holding incentives i believe people are more likely to stay involved rather than sell at the first opportunity they get.
Airdrops themselves are kind of not the problem. The problem is the poor planning and weak fundamentals... because projects that only rely on hype usually fade after the dump but the ones with real utilities, clear roadmaps and strong communities bounce back even stronger after the initial sell off take for instance Pi Network.
Airdrops are not the real issue the structure behind them and the type of audience they attract make the difference many participants only aim for quick profits so once tokens become claimable they rush to sell if a project lacks strong tokenomics or clear utilities the heavy sell pressure quickly pushes prices down giving the impression of failure even when the concept still holds potential.Airdrops can still play an important role they create visibility build initial hype and bring users onto a platform faster than almost any other method the challenge lies in execution when rewards are simply handed out without conditions the result is usually a community filled with short term speculators however when rewards are tied to staking governance tasks or long term holding incentives the community gains a reason to remain active and engaged.
Poor planning and weak fundamentals remain the true killers projects that rely only on hype without delivering genuine value fade quickly after the initial dump on the other hand projects with clear roadmaps utilities and strong communities often bounce back stronger once the early volatility passes pi network serves as an example of how long term vision and consistent engagement can keep interest alive even after heavy skepticism. Airdrops should be seen as tools not solutions by themselves their impact depends entirely on how they are structured and whether the team behind them has built a foundation that can weather the storm of short term profit seekers while still pushing forward with sustainable growth.