Base Token Lost Millions in Minutes – What Happened?
The crypto community is once again facing a heated debate — this time centered around Coinbase-backed Layer-2 network Base token and its now-controversial experiment with a so-called “contentcoin.” The issue stems from Base’s public promotion of a token that soared, crashed, and then recovered — all in the span of a few hours — causing confusion, backlash, and questions about trust and accountability.
What Exactly Happened?
On Wednesday, Base posted “Base is for everyone” on Zora — a Web3 social platform that tokenizes posts automatically. That single post triggered the auto-minting of a token called Base is for everyone on Zora.
Roughly an hour later, Base’s official X (formerly Twitter) account doubled down, uploading an image with the same phrase and replying directly to the token’s page. This public move by Base, a project closely tied to Coinbase, gave the impression of official endorsement.
As a result, the Base token market cap skyrocketed to over $17 million — only to crash by 95% within 20 minutes, wiping out over $15 million in value, according to Dexscreener. The sudden price action and rapid dump caused an outcry, with many users labeling the project a rugpull.
Was This a Pump-and-Dump or Misunderstood Experiment?
While some traders blamed Base and Coinbase for encouraging risky behavior, Base responded by saying they did not create, launch, or profit from the token. They explained that the token was automatically minted by Zora’s platform when a post was made — not something Base intentionally built or backed.
The token’s Zora page even included warnings: it was not affiliated with Base or Coinbase, and buyers should expect no profit or returns. Instead, the coin was positioned as part of a broader experiment in content monetization — the first of several “contentcoins” designed to explore on-chain creative engagement.
But despite the disclaimers, blockchain analysis shows suspicious activity: three wallets purchased large volumes before Base’s public post and made over $666,000 in profits — sparking accusations of insider trading.
What’s the Bigger Picture?
The controversy speaks to the growing tension between innovation and responsibility in crypto. On one hand, Base’s attempt to tokenize digital content via “contentcoins” is a bold step toward a new kind of on-chain interaction. But on the other, poor execution, lack of pre-communication, and perceived official endorsement created real financial consequences for retail users.
AP Collective’s Abhishek Pawa criticized the execution as “disastrous,” noting that traders were left confused, expectations were misaligned, and responses from Base leadership felt “dismissive.” His assessment reflects the broader sentiment that Base underestimated the power and risk of its influence in a market where perception drives price.
Why Did the Token Recover?
Interestingly, after the crash, the token rebounded to around $17.4 million — a sign that speculators are still drawn to Base's high-profile association and the novelty of contentcoin experiments. It also reveals how speculative and sentiment-driven the memecoin space remains.
What’s Next for Base and Contentcoins?
Base and its creator Jesse Pollak have signaled that more contentcoin experiments are coming. They even "coined" a poster for the upcoming FarCon 2025 event on Zora using the same model.
But if Base wants the community to take contentcoin innovation seriously, it must drastically improve transparency, timing, and communication. As one user pointed out, a simple preemptive disclaimer or pinned clarification might have avoided much of the community backlash.
Prediction: Will This Hurt or Help Base in the Long Run?
In the short term, Base may lose trust among some users, especially those who suffered losses in the experiment. However, if the team course-corrects and brings structure to future contentcoin launches, this could evolve into a powerful narrative of decentralized content monetization.
But any further missteps could cement skepticism — especially given Coinbase’s publicly traded status and regulatory visibility.
Bottom Line: The experiment was bold, but messy. Whether it’s remembered as a cautionary tale or a first step toward a new creative economy will depend on how Base handles the next moves.
Read More
How to Create a Crypto Savings Plan on Bitpanda (Step-by-Step Guide)
Leading Crypto Platform Expands Operations in the U.S.
Base Token Lost Millions in Minutes – What Happened?
The crypto community is once again facing a heated debate — this time centered around Coinbase-backed Layer-2 network Base token and its now-controversial experiment with a so-called “contentcoin.” The issue stems from Base’s public promotion of a token that soared, crashed, and then recovered — all in the span of a few hours — causing confusion, backlash, and questions about trust and accountability.
What Exactly Happened?
On Wednesday, Base posted “Base is for everyone” on Zora — a Web3 social platform that tokenizes posts automatically. That single post triggered the auto-minting of a token called Base is for everyone on Zora.
Roughly an hour later, Base’s official X (formerly Twitter) account doubled down, uploading an image with the same phrase and replying directly to the token’s page. This public move by Base, a project closely tied to Coinbase, gave the impression of official endorsement.
As a result, the Base token market cap skyrocketed to over $17 million — only to crash by 95% within 20 minutes, wiping out over $15 million in value, according to Dexscreener. The sudden price action and rapid dump caused an outcry, with many users labeling the project a rugpull.
Was This a Pump-and-Dump or Misunderstood Experiment?
While some traders blamed Base and Coinbase for encouraging risky behavior, Base responded by saying they did not create, launch, or profit from the token. They explained that the token was automatically minted by Zora’s platform when a post was made — not something Base intentionally built or backed.
The token’s Zora page even included warnings: it was not affiliated with Base or Coinbase, and buyers should expect no profit or returns. Instead, the coin was positioned as part of a broader experiment in content monetization — the first of several “contentcoins” designed to explore on-chain creative engagement.
But despite the disclaimers, blockchain analysis shows suspicious activity: three wallets purchased large volumes before Base’s public post and made over $666,000 in profits — sparking accusations of insider trading.
What’s the Bigger Picture?
The controversy speaks to the growing tension between innovation and responsibility in crypto. On one hand, Base’s attempt to tokenize digital content via “contentcoins” is a bold step toward a new kind of on-chain interaction. But on the other, poor execution, lack of pre-communication, and perceived official endorsement created real financial consequences for retail users.
AP Collective’s Abhishek Pawa criticized the execution as “disastrous,” noting that traders were left confused, expectations were misaligned, and responses from Base leadership felt “dismissive.” His assessment reflects the broader sentiment that Base underestimated the power and risk of its influence in a market where perception drives price.
Why Did the Token Recover?
Interestingly, after the crash, the token rebounded to around $17.4 million — a sign that speculators are still drawn to Base's high-profile association and the novelty of contentcoin experiments. It also reveals how speculative and sentiment-driven the memecoin space remains.
What’s Next for Base and Contentcoins?
Base and its creator Jesse Pollak have signaled that more contentcoin experiments are coming. They even "coined" a poster for the upcoming FarCon 2025 event on Zora using the same model.
But if Base wants the community to take contentcoin innovation seriously, it must drastically improve transparency, timing, and communication. As one user pointed out, a simple preemptive disclaimer or pinned clarification might have avoided much of the community backlash.
Prediction: Will This Hurt or Help Base in the Long Run?
In the short term, Base may lose trust among some users, especially those who suffered losses in the experiment. However, if the team course-corrects and brings structure to future contentcoin launches, this could evolve into a powerful narrative of decentralized content monetization.
But any further missteps could cement skepticism — especially given Coinbase’s publicly traded status and regulatory visibility.
Bottom Line: The experiment was bold, but messy. Whether it’s remembered as a cautionary tale or a first step toward a new creative economy will depend on how Base handles the next moves.
Read More
How to Create a Crypto Savings Plan on Bitpanda (Step-by-Step Guide)