MetaMorphy

Beanz metadata was given/leaked from Azuki team to either themselves or a friend to trade on. Here's the proof: opensea.io/0x937cbD676101… You can clearly see that 3-4 hours before reveal, this person sold 4 UNREVEALED beanz at fp, only to pick up 2 above fp. cont.

Some more examples from the past couple minutes.... Honestly guys just sit out of this one. A few people might make a little bit. But with the royalties the majority of people are gonna get washed and the only winners are the ones you don't want to win - the Azuki team.

(Sorry Zainy I didnt mean to call you out specifically just wanted to give an example) Just know you're not alone and the sales feed is filled with people attempting to try to flip it.

Like 80% of the volume traded in #azuki today are people desperate to try to ride the momentum and make a few bucks. So while everyone is trying to do that, they're still making 5% of every sale. Oh btw I'm seeing stuff like this all over the sales feed.

@Tinobambino13 Yep, looks like it's all coming together

@Meta_Morphy Days before the real drama unfolded 🤯

Beanz metadata was given/leaked from Azuki team to either themselves or a friend to trade on. Here's the proof: opensea.io/0x937cbD676101… You can clearly see that 3-4 hours before reveal, this person sold 4 UNREVEALED beanz at fp, only to pick up 2 above fp. cont.

In case you're out of the loop, the founder just admitted to rugging 3 previous projects.

So like...are #azuki holders still going to tell me that Azuki would never do anything shady and that the Beanz metadata leak was still a person getting completely lucky?

@Medleys_ @AzukiOfficial The evidence certainly seems to back it up.

@AzukiOfficial accused of insider trading prior to Azuki #BEANZ reveal. @Meta_Morphy any truth to this? #NFTCommunity #azukibeanz #NFTs

@bax1337 @Honest_NFT I think one more thing to note (and wasn't factored in) was that he bought an additional one off looksrare, and picked up a golden Beanz, 30 minutes before reveal. So he bought another rare, at a different time, on a different platform. Clearly someone searching.

@bax1337 @Honest_NFT Well written, I had addressed in the thread that I agreed when people double checked that it was around floor price, but like you said, the simultaneous buying and selling on anonymous accounts + then creating brand new accounts to sell the rare ones is too suspect.

Allegations that @AzukiOfficial's BEANZ launch was sniped by insiders were made yesterday and were amplified by some popular NFT accounts 🙄 Using the @Honest_NFT shenanigan scanning tools, I took a very close look at this drop. 🧵(1/14)

@V1Zhual If you were able to access this somehow without repurcussions it seems there would be no need to try to obfuscate your trail.

@Meta_Morphy Their answer twitter.com/locationtba/st…

@V1Zhual And if so, why would this buyer attempt to try to do this all on alt accounts? His accounts have very little activity, and the sales he/she is attempting to pull off is on new completely unused wallet addresses now.

@V1Zhual Awesome that they answered. Still additional questions to be answered then. How would one hypothetically be able to monitor IPFS? the ifps link would be hidden behind a hash, similar to guessing someone's private key, no? Were no Azuki staff members able to access this link?

@BabyJaz47772107 @MinnesotaHaze Lets just agree hypothetically that were true. What other explanation do you have for someone selling 4 under floor, buying more at the same time before his even sold, and on different platforms, and then transferring them out to brand new wallets to sell?

@bax1337 What if you were take into account the fact that all 4 he sold were also commons? Even more improbable, correct?

@Meta_Morphy It's really hard to take that into account for statistics purposes. Here's the odds that the NFTs were bought randomly as calculated by a "K-S" test. That being said, it's indefensible that a ~10000 ETH NFT drop didn't use a provably fair commit-reveal scheme.

@MinnesotaHaze So looks like something like this? 0.00001412012% chance of it being random?

@MinnesotaHaze Add in the fact that selling 4 are all not rares as well? What does that change to?

@bax1337 You may be right on this part, looking into it further I agree- I can't edit my original tweet but that shouldn't detract from every other part of the post. I think the most damning part may be the fact that he listed his 4 commons up and bought another one even before his sold.

@Meta_Morphy I don't think they were above floor price. Here's the OpenSea sales data which shows the sale prices before and after. As for probability, they obviously got lucky but not "anomalously" so. I can't defend the choice to not use a *provably* fair commit-reveal scheme.

There's just no way to defend this action as normal, especially when combined with everything else in context.

For those who are saying "he got lucky, he got swept and then fomo'ed" He listed his up and started buying the rare before his got even sold He listed his originals up, then went and bought this rank 37 one, then the rest of his sold 4 minutes later.