Peanut Squirrel’s Owner Launches JUSTICE Meme Coin, Raises Concerns Over Insider Manipulation and Centralization

The recently launched JUSTICE meme coin by Mark Longo, the owner of Peanut the Squirrel, has sparked significant controversy within the crypto community. While its rapid rise and sky-high market cap caught the attention of investors, analysts are now raising red flags over what appears to be centralized control over the majority of the token’s supply, suggesting that insider manipulation could be at play.

JUSTICE Coin Gains Momentum Amidst Growing Allegations

JUSTICE, a meme coin launched by Mark Longo as a response to the viral success of the Peanut the Squirrel meme coin (PNUT), has seen an explosive surge in both price and market cap. After its launch, JUSTICE’s price skyrocketed by over 50,000%, and its market cap quickly surged to $13 million, drawing attention from both meme coin enthusiasts and investors alike.

Longo, who has previously expressed frustration over the commercial exploitation of Peanut’s internet fame without proper compensation, launched JUSTICE as a form of protest against the lucrative rise of PNUT. In his eyes, this was an attempt to reclaim control over the legacy of his late pet.

However, beneath the surface of the meme coin’s meteoric rise, troubling signs are emerging that could undermine its credibility and long-term viability.

Concerns About Insider Control Over Token Supply

According to an investigation by Bubblemaps, a blockchain analytics firm, nearly 80% of the JUSTICE token supply appears to be under the control of a small, coordinated group. In a post shared on social media platform X on November 26, Bubblemaps outlined the alarming findings, noting that the vast majority of JUSTICE tokens were acquired by a select few addresses before Longo’s official public announcement.

The firm’s analysis reveals that the top 45 holders of JUSTICE tokens were all funded within a short, three-hour window on November 24. These holders were linked to centralized exchange hot wallets or other protocols, raising serious concerns about the decentralization of the token. The rapid concentration of tokens among these addresses suggests that the distribution may not have been as organic as it seemed, leading to accusations of coordinated manipulation.

A “Cash Grab” or Revenge Plot?

The most significant concern surrounding the JUSTICE meme coin is whether its creation is truly in the spirit of decentralization and empowerment for the crypto community, or if it is simply an attempt by Longo to capitalize on his pet’s legacy and settle scores with the community. The fact that a small group controls such a large portion of the token’s supply has fueled speculation that the entire venture could be a “revenge plot” or a “cash grab.”

Bubblemaps has also raised doubts about the overall legitimacy of the project, noting that the concentration of power in the hands of a few individuals could lead to market manipulation and a lack of transparency. Analysts are questioning whether the meme coin’s rapid rise is sustainable or if it is merely a speculative bubble driven by insider control. They warn investors to be cautious, as the risks involved with such a highly centralized asset could be disastrous if the token’s price suddenly plummets.

Longo’s History of Controversy and Legal Threats

Mark Longo is no stranger to controversy, especially when it comes to the commercial use of Peanut the Squirrel’s viral fame. Earlier this year, Longo made headlines after threatening to sue holders of the PNUT token, accusing them of copyright infringement. He claimed that they had exploited Peanut’s legacy for financial gain without offering him any compensation. This legal threat further fueled the narrative that Longo is deeply invested in the financial aspects of his pet’s fame, rather than simply honoring Peanut’s memory.

Longo’s statements regarding his intentions with the JUSTICE token suggest that he aims to take control of the narrative surrounding Peanut the Squirrel’s fame. In a now-deleted post on X, he stated that he wanted to reclaim the ownership of his pet’s story and prevent further commercialization without his involvement. However, the launch of JUSTICE under such questionable circumstances has led many to wonder if Longo’s actions are motivated by genuine intentions or by a desire to profit from the growing meme coin craze.

What Does This Mean for Investors?

The rise of JUSTICE raises serious concerns about the state of meme coins and decentralized finance in general. While the market for meme coins has proven to be highly volatile and prone to manipulation, the concentration of power in the hands of a few addresses in the case of JUSTICE is especially concerning. The lack of true decentralization could make the token vulnerable to manipulation and pump-and-dump schemes, putting investors at significant risk.

As the situation develops, analysts are urging caution and advising potential investors to carefully consider the implications of buying into a token with such centralized control. While Longo may see JUSTICE as a way to regain control over his pet’s story, the risks associated with insider manipulation and lack of transparency are too significant to ignore.

The Road Ahead for JUSTICE and Meme Coins

As the crypto world continues to evolve, the case of JUSTICE serves as a stark reminder of the potential dangers of meme coins and tokens that lack proper decentralization. While meme coins can offer significant gains, they also come with a heightened risk of manipulation and market volatility.

For Longo, the future of JUSTICE will depend on how the token’s distribution evolves and whether it can overcome the concerns about centralization.

For investors, the key to navigating this rapidly shifting landscape will be to remain vigilant and aware of the risks involved with buying into projects that lack transparency and decentralization.

In the end, the story of JUSTICE could serve as a cautionary tale about the importance of decentralization in the crypto space and the need for greater scrutiny of projects that promise to disrupt the status quo, but may be driven more by personal motives than genuine innovation.