Original Interview: Coffeezilla, YouTuber & Cryptocurrency Journalist;
Guest: Hayden Davis, one of the main creators of LIBRA;
Original Translation: ChatGPT

Editor's Note: Hayden Davis of Kelsier Ventures is one of the four main creators of LIBRA, with the other three being Julian Peh of the Kip Protocol, Mauricio Novelli of the Argentina Tech Forum, and Manuel Godoy. The project received support from Javier Milei on February 14, 2025. In this video, the creator Coffeezilla interviewed Hayden, attempting to uncover what exactly happened with LIBRA. During the interview, Hayden admitted that the LIBRA team sniped the release of LIBRA, and the MELANIA team also sniped the release of MELANIA.

The following is the original content (slightly restructured for clarity):

TL;DR

Coffeezilla: For the past 48 hours, I've been investigating an Argentine meme coin called LIBRA. If you're unaware, the Argentine president publicly endorsed this meme coin, and shortly after, it crashed, leaving people wondering where $100 million in funds went, as if it disappeared. I've been in touch with key players in this event, trying to find answers. Next, you'll hear an hour-long interview with Hayden Davis, a key figure in this issuance who has been involved in many token decisions. Currently, he holds $100 million in funds and is contemplating how to deal with this sum. You'll discover during the conversation that this isn't our first interaction. I've attempted to reach out to him over the past 24 to 48 hours.

This interview isn't me pushing my narrative, as I'm just seeking information. I feel like what we lack most is answers. So, it was more about listening, and although I think we got some very crucial admissions in this conversation, I want to clarify that this isn't my usual "scammer" style; it's actually intentional. From the start, this person was very nervous, so I didn't feel like responding in that way was appropriate. Everyone will have their own opinion of this person based on what you hear.

But I believe a more neutral way is to let this person speak for themselves. This is their first public statement since the Twitter post. The Twitter post was only a minute long and did not receive a good response. So, I wanted to give them a chance to disclose all the information at once. The interview started abruptly because they mentioned some non-public information at the beginning, which I had to cut out. However, I hope this interview can provide some clues to the truth of the matter.

Not "Rug Pull," but a Failed Plan to Drive Away Other Snipers

Coffeezilla: I would like to know if we can consider this part as an official record? Because I don't want to include those private details that shouldn't be public. Thank you for the background information provided; the part about LIBRA is the key focus.

Hayden Davis: Sure, the part about LIBRA is fine. Okay, let's continue. One of the issues with LIBRA is that when you launched on Meteora, you tried to avoid all these snipers, but the problem is... there were no specific safeguards, such as situations like insider control. The real issue is that, you know, during a large issuance, all the trading volume comes in, and then you see, this guy—on a big wallet—unexpectedly did not sell much. I also don't understand why, but he had $57 million, and the market cap of LIBRA was $4.5 billion or $5 billion, and that's where the issue lies. It's not $4.5 billion. So, you have to make a real-time decision, like, "Okay, should I pull some out from the liquidity pool, protect the floor price, knowing that there will be more marketing plans ahead?" or, "Should I let the chart crash?" That's what happens every time there's an issuance; 3 to 10 guys will receive a large sum. They are all terrible snipers, just looking to unload. You can't track them at all. Either it takes too long, or it's just not possible. So, this happens every time there's an issuance.

Regarding the specific situation of LIBRA, I am pleased to share that although Javier and his team told me there will be an important interview broadcast on TV tomorrow, I don't consider this entirely public, but he will clarify me and the LIBRA project because he's obviously under public pressure. Basically, at the launch of LIBRA, our goal was: "Can we collect enough liquidity?" Although some might say this is just a snippet or an incomplete statement, the goal was to collect enough liquidity because Milei is preparing to do a second video, and there are some other... I won't name names, but some high-profile individuals will be involved, posting tweets, marketing videos.

So our goal was, could we at this stage pull enough liquidity out, drive away these snipers, at least control them so that when the chart goes down, it doesn't destroy the entire project. Then have Milei release the second round video and reinject most of the capital, or at least most of the liquidity, creating a super large issuance. As for why he took down the post, I still don't have a clear answer. I guess he may have faced tremendous political pressure, as a person from a non-crypto background, he might have felt panicked. I can understand. If I were him, I would react the same way.

Now we are working hard to figure out what to do next. But some people say this is a "rug pull." That's obviously not true, because there are still 60 million tokens locked in the liquidity pool, right? The market cap is 300 million, it's not a "rug pull," it's a failed plan, with 100 million in hand, I am the custodian of this fund, but I don't know what to do. I don't want to become a public enemy, I didn't benefit from it, instead, my life is in danger.

Coffeezilla: Yes, there are a few points I want to talk about. Thank you for your explanation. Regarding the 100 million dollars, I think the public's view is that a term like "rug pull" has been widely used, basically it has taken on a colloquial meaning, referring to unfair value extraction. My understanding is that this unfair value extraction refers to taking money away, and for the whereabouts of this 100 million dollars, it seems not clearly stated, so people will think they just want to profit from it, right? Everyone's view is that this 100 million is profit. So obviously something needs to be done to put this money back into the market, trying to get it back into the hands of the people. This process is definitely very complex because it is necessary to prevent anyone from continuing to take advantage of the situation.

Hayden Davis: Yes, indeed. If I may add, it is also multifaceted because it is a meme coin. If you bet your entire portfolio on a meme coin, then... although this is not financial advice, that is a very foolish act.

Hayden Davis: I see, but at the same time, if you take this into consideration, I have discussed this today with a few people, how to evaluate the value of a token, especially when it is not yet "dead." The President is very likely to continue to support it, so it will definitely have some rebound space. You must control the narrative well: "Well, people lose money because they choose to sell, but this token is not dead." However, the problem is, no one can give me a clear answer.

Coffeezilla: Understood. If Milei really turns around, I would be very surprised. I think he will distance himself from this matter, probably wash his hands of it. However, I could also be wrong. I don't fully understand the whole situation. I have a question, just answer "yes" or "no": Will Milei make money from this? No, right? My second question is, are the two people involved in this issuance Manuel and Mauricio? Yes, they come from an Argentine Tech team. That's right. The Kip protocol will be responsible for operating a non-profit organization, like a foundation.

Hayden Davis: Yes, that's correct.

Coffeezilla: They didn't have much involvement, and then you were supposed to launch the coin, but you were not responsible for allocating these funds.

Hayden Davis: Yes, I can elaborate a bit more. This plan was originally an experiment, right? Milei was very eager to put everything on-chain, to make everything transparent, such as tokenizing all the financial transactions of all countries, right? So I and many different people, different foundations were discussing what this would look like in the coming years. The initial idea was, well, in that case, let's do an experiment to see how it goes. Because, frankly, although he supported it, this was not his official meme coin, let's make that clear. Well, let's start with that.

Coffeezilla: Right, so you know, one very important part of this is that everyone is trying to figure out what exactly happened. This money was taken out of the account, and then there were allegations of insiders knowing the information before the contract was released. All these KOLs, essentially, industry insiders knew about this coin before the launch, so they might have either shared this information with others, which is not good because it gave some people an unfair advantage. Second, they themselves might have profited from this information.

I think a very simple example is Dave Portnoy; he knew about this coin two weeks before the launch, right? So he knew about this. By the way, to clarify, even though Dave claimed he knew the coin might be released, he said he did not buy before the release or buy as an insider. He bought about ten minutes after Milei tweeted. If he could, he said he would buy $10 million. So to clarify, although he knew about the coin's existence, his statement was that he did not trade in advance. Just want to make sure we include that in the story too. He had time to raise $5 million and traded the coin. Then he lost money, ironically, and then you guys refunded him. This is what I think many people see as insider benefits and unfairness, everyone will feel how manipulated it is. He traded $5 million worth of coins, lost, and in the end, you refunded him. Right?

Hayden Davis: A few points. One, that was a mistake on my part at that time, to be honest, I don't remember that time, but it was late at night, I was communicating back and forth with him, I was thinking that Milei would openly support this coin, it was no big deal, I didn't want Dave to lose money, and I didn't think about it from the perspective that everyone would question this. So I might need to talk to him; I am sure we will discuss some different terms about those who knew about the coin. I mean, I can't say whether I or anyone who knew this information, Manuel or Mauricio, informed others.

What I can tell you is, very few people know. The so-called insiders have always been a mystery to me because every meme coin I know of or have invested in, or every project I've been involved in, the ones who benefit the most are usually those involved in structured transactions, just like in any other business in the world, those closest usually make the most or lose the most. So, I don't think that's insider trading. I think it's just the angry people in the crypto circle who always feel there's an unfair advantage. If you're a genius on-chain and you know how to game Meteora, there are 30 people in the world who are better at it than anyone else. So, yeah, but some people feel like it's...

Coffeezilla: No, that's not right; there are indeed unfair rules of the game, and many people know everything about stocks. You can be Warren Buffett, but Buffett and people who have insider information on a company like Pfizer and use that information to trade are different. So I think everyone's frustration is not that you're good at trading, but that you know some information the public doesn't know and have used that information to make trading decisions, which is illegal in the open market, that's called insider trading.

Hayden Davis: Yeah, but with meme coins, A, it's not illegal, and B, it's the norm for each trade. I mean, every KOL, everyone in the world, makes money this way. They know news about a project, strike a deal with the project team, and then make money from it. Like this. If you accuse this, then you have to accuse everything else. Yes, that's like, I really think...

Coffeezilla: I think this is very bad, I really think this is very bad. For everyone except insiders, that's my take on meme coins, it benefits insiders.

Hayden Davis: So I think, to be honest, I'm not against it, but I think the majority of people who bet on meme coins, especially those early on, I think that's a separate issue, retail investors are all playing this game. And those angry people are exactly those who are not insiders. That's what's happening. All the complaints on social media are from those who couldn't get into the trade. You will never hear from them if they were in the trade. So the question is, what do you do? Do you do nothing? Do you stop the issuance of coins? Then what do you do? The issue becomes that.

Coffeezilla: It's very clear. Making a trade and using information you've obtained inside a project to make a trade decision are two different things. If I'm compensated for a tweet, assuming I disclose that, I don't see a problem with that. But if I have inside information on this project and then buy $1 million worth of coins based on that insider information, I think that's wrong and should be eradicated. If people think these markets should be treated like the capital markets, then this is...

Hayden Davis: I don't think so, and I don't think people should view them as a capital market because they are not a capital market at all; that is not their essence.

Coffeezilla: But you are a trader, so of course, you should think that way, right?

Hayden Davis: Even so, even in those trades, I am just placing a bet. If I put money into it, I think it could go to zero; I have no idea. Right? So I don't treat it as a regular stock; I treat it as a casino because that is its essence.

Coffeezilla: Yes, but it's strange that those who always say, "Oh, there shouldn't be this regulation, that regulation," are often the ones tilting the table in the casino. I've heard Dave or me talk about, "Oh, you crybabies in the trenches." Well, Doctor, how's the taste? Well, first of all, most crybabies in the trenches didn't receive a $5 million refund. Secondly, Dave is like, "Oh, you're mad at me because I sold your coin before you." You're just...

Hayden Davis: You're mad because you didn't sell.

Coffeezilla: I'm not mad. Of course, the ones with the most leverage control in the casino are those who say, "We don't think what we say or do should have any rules; as long as we publicly declare, hey, I'm going to do this to you, you know, it's good." Right?

Hayden Davis: But let me say, first of all, Dave is a good guy. Secondly, Dave doesn't really understand how meme coins operate. He doesn't, he really doesn't, I mean, he just realized a few weeks ago, "Oh, so if I bet on this coin and then talk about it, the price goes up. It's crazy, why is that? What should I do? How should I handle this?"

Acknowledging the LIBRA Team's Coin Sniping

Coffeezilla: Wait a minute, I don't want to focus on him because in some ways I still appreciate his transparency. And this shows a lot of behind-the-scenes things we don't see. But I just want to make a broader point, that everyone says, "Yes, we should ease regulation, these coins should not be treated like other projects," and those people are often the ones manipulating the game or have some kind of vested interest. This is an unfair advantage. As you said, those who complain are the ones without an unfair advantage, and those who don't complain are the ones with an unfair advantage. I think that's a valid statement. I want to step back from this topic because, well, these wallets seem to be related to you and the coin you issued, right? For example, in the case of LIBRA, there is a wallet from which Dave received a refund, and he said that wallet is your personal funds, and this wallet is related to an Avalanche wallet, which is the sniper of LIBRA. So, if you issued this coin, did you also unfairly participate in this sniping?

Hayden Davis: I would like to say no, and there are several reasons for that. First of all, most of the time, as I mentioned before, this is actually a larger topic, as I mentioned in the text I sent you. Most of the time, when we are sniping, our goal is to prevent other snipers from entering. So, in any case, I don't engage in sniping, I'm not that kind of person. Like, I don't know how to snipe. If you put me in front of a computer and ask me to snipe, I wouldn't even know how to do it. I've never dealt with bots, I don't understand those things at all.

Coffeezilla: But you don't deny that a wallet associated with you participated in sniping LIBRA.

Hayden Davis: I wouldn't say it's associated with me. I would say it's associated with...

Coffeezilla: No, it's associated with the wallet that refunded Dave, and Dave said that wallet was your personal funds.

Hayden Davis: That was just a coincidence that happened under the pressure of our fund transfer. But that was just a mistake. I mean, if there was any issue, actually, what I mean is, at that time when we reinvested the money back into the market, it would flow back into the market through another wallet, just like the funds we were considering.

Hayden Davis: The so-called "sniping," you could say it's the project's funds, right? That's what we do, whenever we do this, that's how we do it. Most of the time, the purpose of sniping is to prevent other snipers from entering. If the project has enough trading volume, we use it to ensure it can continue to operate. I think this is hard for many people to understand.

Coffeezilla: I agree, I agree with that. I think it's indeed hard to understand.

Hayden Davis: Because you see, like, give you a good example. If you look at TRUMP, look at those sniping situations, Trump's trading volume is very large, those snipes are not important at all, they have almost no effect.

Coffeezilla: No, wait a minute. That's not right. There was one person who sniped with $1 million early on, the MELANIA crash, everyone thought it was because of MELANIA, but actually it was that sniper selling tens of millions of dollars' worth of coins.

Hayden Davis: Of course, there was that one who did $84 million, right? I mean, we could argue all day. My point of view is, when you are part of the team, sniping doesn't always mean it should happen, but what I'm trying to say is, many times it's for protection. If the trading volume is large enough, you can take some out to give others a chance to push the price back up. Because for meme coins, they rise and fall too quickly, these projects could collapse in two days. And the only hope is that you have enough funds to fight those snipers. This is the discussion everyone has on Solana, everyone who understands these launch methods will talk about this topic.

Coffeezilla: Do you think the public is aware that when a project launches, the project team will snipe that project? Because I try to look at this with the most forgiving view, assuming that this money isn't meant for profit but rather for the good of the project, right? I feel the public is unaware of these secretive activities, such as operating through these "side wallets," which in itself is a bit problematic. And the project team is in control of the project's price, which is like a strange form of price manipulation. You might say, "If the price is too high, we'll trim some off the chart." And this also renders the concept of a "treasury wallet" meaningless because it seems like you also have a sniper wallet as part of the treasury. There is zero transparency to the public about these matters. Frankly, do you think this situation occurs frequently?

Hayden Davis: I think this is something that happens frequently in all meme coin projects, unless they completely collapse and get rug pulled, hoping no one messes up. But I must say, this is my very transparent attitude, perhaps a bit of oversharing, I don't care. All these things are because some people have figured out how to leverage the blockchain system.

Hayden Davis: When you are in charge and trying to make these projects last, basically, everyone launching these projects, unless they are just malicious, is trying to figure out how to make these projects last.

Hayden Davis: Like my whole goal entering this industry was, if you want to hear Dave's story, you could just briefly mention it. There was a situation where the Milei team wanted Dave to come on board so they could do some cross-platform promotions, even potentially do an interview similar to what he did with Trump, and even if Dave had a project, there might be opportunities to benefit their holders, creating another social fintech project.

Hayden Davis: It's like, we've just been trying to figure out how to do this. And what always messes things up is large-scale sniping. That is the primary factor that makes everything worse, and there's no solution because those people have left, taking with them eighty million, a hundred million, or even two hundred million, and nothing happens to them, while others get scammed, and the project gets blamed.

Hayden Davis: So, um, I mean, is sniper activity the most ethical behavior in history? No. But I think nobody has figured out how to better contain it, especially when the project is just launching, only snipers can see the launch, only snipers can see the contract address. And they've been manipulating on Radium, Meteora, and they are pretty sure they also manipulated on Orca.

Coffeezilla: So, let me say, I think self-sniping your own project is just insane. But I will agree, sniping is indeed a massive issue with all these meme coins. I also think insider information is a big problem. I think both can coexist. Some of the sniping is indeed a result of insider leaks, such as in...

Hayden Davis: I disagree.

Coffeezilla: You can disagree, but there are indeed some Alpha groups who, on one hand, look for on-chain information, and on the other hand, look for early contract leaks, they pay to get those early contract addresses, and then they snipe.

Hayden Davis: Yeah, but so what? So what, what's the solution? You don't launch a project, or you try to protect it? Well, I ask you, what would you do?

Coffeezilla: Philosophically, I think meme coins are a zero-sum game, extracting value from the majority of participants, and through its operation, transaction structure, and the mechanism where for someone to make a dollar, another person has to lose a dollar, it's inherently unfair. So I think from the outset, the overall direction of this industry is wrong. But obviously, I will focus on issues with unfair elements, such as fraud or insider trading, or things that people generally consider wrong. Because if people want to participate in meme coins, no problem. But I believe that if they are going to participate, at the very least the market should be fair. I think meme coins are stupid, but even if you want to engage in these stupid things, it should still be fair.

It's like what happens in a casino, right? Casinos not only have unfair gambling elements but are also rife with a lot of fraudulent behavior. So, they end up being tightly regulated. Why do casinos need regulation? Because people get scammed. So I think similar things should eventually happen to these projects as well, although there is currently a significant push to decentralize everything.

Admission of Participation in MELANIA Coin Launch Snipe

Coffeezilla: Obviously, I know this is a somewhat sensitive topic, but I have to ask because it's part of my story. Many people associate you with the MELANIA launch, which is a big issue on everyone's mind, especially mine. The question is, did you participate in the MELANIA launch? Was that launch also sniped?

Hayden Davis: I feel like, I've told you this before, but I'll say it again. No, I'm willing to share the truth, but you're asking a factual question that could put me in great danger, but it's okay, I'll answer. I was involved. I think the team did want to snipe because the snipe amount for TRUMP was very high. And we're not big snipers, we're absolutely not, we tried to avoid that situation. We did not make any money from the MELANIA team, we did not pull any liquidity.

Coffeezilla: Well, wow, this is quite a shocking revelation. But I want to zoom in on this point a bit. You mentioned, "we did not pull any funds from liquidity," but we traced one of the wallets that received $1.5 million worth of MELANIA tokens from an address. And then that wallet seemed to have sold off the received tokens. So you say you didn't sell any liquidity, but...

Hayden Davis: I did not. There was no exchange of liquidity, nor a swap for a single asset. I did not say no money was sold. Exchanging liquidity and selling off liquidity are two different things.

Coffeezilla: Oh, so you exchanged but didn't sell off, or was it the other way around?

Hayden Davis: No, the other way around.

Coffeezilla: The other way around? Sold off, but didn't exchange? Hmm, interesting. Alright, were those the two main presales you were involved with? I also heard about presales like Hood, was that you as well? I know it's all messy, but I think you've been relatively transparent about these things, so thank you for being candid. You at least seem honest about these things.

Hayden Davis: I actually...

Coffeezilla: Own $100 million?

Hayden Davis: Look, about the $100 million thing, I need to say one thing first. About things like these, all these things, there's really nothing special about it. You know, some people are trying to say, "how is he related to Dave and Milei?" I'm not a special person. I tracked all this because I wanted to get two things. First, I thought meme coins were a step in social finance. I now find out that this was actually wrong, and everyone wants to kill me because I facilitated these things. Secondly, I think you and others should at least spend some time thinking about what to do, how people should make money from these projects. Because in reality, there's only one way, right? That's fees, the fees on the large presales are very small. Then there is the platform, whether it's a "rug pull" or a successful project, they can make a lot of money, and I firmly disagree with this. I totally disagree with this practice. Platforms like Meteora, Jupiter, Bullex, Photon, no matter what, they are all making money from transaction fees. Even if people lose money, they still make money, which I find very wrong. I have told many owners of these platforms that this practice is wrong, there should be some kind of refund policy.

Hayden Davis: Anyway, besides these, the issue is when the system is already broken, and you are trying to fix it, organizing different launches, different mechanisms, considering starting from high market cap, deciding who should be involved, who should not, how to retain the contract address, how to market without telling people, what should you do?

If this conversation is going to be recorded and made public, I hope there can be at least some thought because even the best people in the crypto industry don't have an answer. They don't, no one knows what to do. And I have been constantly thinking, "What should we do? How can we make money cleanly? Is this possible?" You know, well...

Coffeezilla: Fundamentally, wait a minute, fundamentally, I think the reason why people in the crypto industry don't have a good answer is that the real answer that no one wants to hear is that, something like a "Tulip Mania" event, how to fairly make money. You can build it in many different ways, but anything that extracts value from the majority of the world is not a good thing by definition. So I think...

Hayden Davis: Stop talking about value extraction, but every crypto project, whether venture capital-backed or a meme coin, is extracting value.

Coffeezilla: No? Wait a minute, I think there is a difference. The difference is that some things have utility value. Although this term is used frequently, there are indeed some tools that can do things, provide a service, and then there is talk of value. And then there are some things that have absolutely no intrinsic value, right? But...

Hayden Davis: That is still value extraction. It doesn't matter if it has utility or not, it's all the same.

Coffeezilla: Not necessarily. Not necessarily. Like, for example, a company like Coca-Cola. You can say they made a lot of money for shareholders, but they also provided a service. You can have different opinions about this service, but at least they provided a product that people are willing to pay for, and they provided dividends to shareholders. So shareholders, no matter if they spend $1 to buy in, end up with $1, but they earn money from the dividends.

Coffeezilla: This is not a zero-sum game. Coca-Cola is not playing a zero-sum game. Neither is Apple. These companies in the capital market are not playing a zero-sum game. They are creating something. That is where their value lies. And in the cryptocurrency field, the initial idea was that, although it was a bit speculative at first, what you should care about is that there is value behind it, there is some financial technology behind it. I think that is the main point.

Hayden Davis: But look at any cryptocurrency, like Bitcoin. Bitcoin's value comes from a large group of people believing it has value, and it is "supposedly" not controlled by anyone. Even at the top, it is fundamentally a value extraction. All cryptocurrencies, whether meme coins or large-scale utility projects, have this nature of extracting value. Ultimately, all our efforts are aimed at avoiding this situation, which would require significant progress to achieve.

Coffeezilla: But this progress is unlikely to occur with meme coins, right?

Hayden Davis: In conclusion, I'm not saying I'm right; I'm just saying this is my idea. I don't think I'm necessarily right. But my thought is, if these meme coins can work through collaboration, cross-promotion, token burns, and increased utility, they might eventually create some social financial potential. But to achieve this, there will be a lot of stupid things happening along the way.

Coffeezilla: Yes, I'm very willing to continue discussing this issue. You now have $100 million in your hands, and you are trying to find a solution. You and I have chatted via text, and the advice I gave may not be perfect, but I think the suggestion is, first, you need to take a snapshot, calculate gains and losses, find out who lost money, and distribute the losses proportionally. If you know these, you might focus on smaller losses, such as setting one person's maximum loss amount at $50,000; assuming that exceeding this amount may involve more experienced traders. During the review, special attention should be paid to less savvy investors, such as a user from Argentina who may have just seen Milei's tweet and dumped money in, or some users from the United States who invested around $1,000. You can compensate some people for their losses in this way. The downside is that it requires a lot of time and data analysis companies; frankly, I think it takes a lot of effort, but this is currently the most reasonable approach, considering the current chaotic situation.

Hayden Davis: Yes, I've basically been told about four options. If someone is willing to help, that would be great. The text I sent you is not at all intended to tell a "sad story," but I really need a trustworthy person to help me because I really don't know what to do. I also don't want to be blamed for a situation I never intended to create.

Hayden Davis: Remember, the trouble is, this is the Milei project of the Argentine government, not a team I'm responsible for. I will repeat this a hundred times. I never thought about getting into this position. In any case, there are several options. The first is no refunds, donate all the money to an Argentine nonprofit organization, and then tell everyone "it's okay." But I think this is really a bad idea. The second option is a refund. But the refund will be based on a series of different metrics, and people will still be angry and come after me. So no, I have been advised by many that this is a bad idea. Although I do believe people should get a refund, even if meme coins are entirely speculative, it's ridiculous for people to put all their savings into them. I still think, based on my thoughts and the perspective of the analysis company, a refund is still possible based on a certain price. The third option is to reinject all the money back into the market. I did a calculation to see how much money we have, even in the face of a significant amount of selling pressure.

Coffeezilla: How big is the sell pressure?

Hayden Davis: How far can we push it?

Coffeezilla: No, how much money is in the bank account right now?

Hayden Davis: About 100 million. I'm pretty much at that number. And then there are fees. So it's probably around 110 million, um, around that number. Approximately 110 million in cash.

Hayden Davis: Because these tokens can be reinjected into the market. I made a chart. If we inject all this money into the market, its market cap could rise to around 2.5 to 3 billion dollars, which is close to the all-time high. This way, it at least gives it a chance. And, I have no responsibility for this, right? Then everyone can say, oh well, the money's back in the market anyway. And someone might say, oh, he used to buy this token, and so on. In fact, in any case, I will not buy this token again. I want to get rid of it. It's a huge nightmare for me.

Coffeezilla: Let me tell you my opinion, because I strongly believe this is a mistake. Let me quickly tell you why this is a disaster, why it will bring more problems.

First of all, this is an unfair solution. At least a proportional distribution is fair, trying to maintain fairness. But what you're talking about is a launch that has already been front-run, taken advantage of by some of the fastest people. The way you're solving it is, well, let's do something that also allows these front-runners and bots to exploit the capital we're injecting. Once you announce, hey, we're considering doing this. If you're a savvy speculator, you'll know, hey, this guy is going to push the market cap to 2 billion dollars. You can buy some LIBRA coins at a low price. Now, I'm not recommending anyone do this. But even when you tell me this idea, it has already created opportunities for insider trading. I can run over, gather some money, invest in LIBRA coins, and then wait for you to reinject the capital. I can say, hey, Hayden, inject the money into the market, do it. You inject 2 billion dollars, and I can make 100 times. That's a disaster. So once you do this, there will be insider trading issues.

Hayden Davis: Why? Why is it a disaster? Why is it a disaster? If I announce this is my intent, it gives everyone an opportunity, and everyone can buy in. It's not insider trading then. It's a completely free market, and everyone knows the money will return to the market, so it's actually completely transparent.

Coffeezilla: But even so, when you decided to buy in, the smarter ones could profit from it, right? But in that case...

Hayden Davis: Right. Actually, whether it's a launch or funding, the result is the same. Either way, it's all the same. Like you said, whether I refund or reinvest, people will still be angry. Refund to people, that sounds crazy, or I reinvest again, and people will still be angry. So why...

Coffeezilla: If you just say, hey, everyone, of course they may not get all their money back, why would people be angry?

Hayden Davis: Because some people would say to me, hey, give me $1.5 million, or I'll go kill your family. So no matter if I refund or not, I still have to deal with these people.

Coffeezilla: Are you really planning to...

Hayden Davis: Of course not! But now, I have to protect my whole family.

Coffeezilla: No, first thing you should do is take the money out of your hands. You need to find a reputable company, establish a legal structure, and take that money out of your hands. That way, you, Hayden, won't have control. The reason you're scared right now is because you do have $100 million in control. But this...

Hayden Davis: Right, exactly. But if I were to be very transparent and honest, this is also my leverage over certain groups and various aspects. In fact, I have control, and it made me a target, but also protected me because this is an international event. This is not a random scam. It's a plan gone wrong at a presidential level.

Coffeezilla: Actually, I agree with your point. It's a plan. So if I...

Hayden Davis: Give it to someone else for safekeeping, right, even a trusted third party, I would lose my leverage. So, until I get an answer from Javier Milei, until I get an answer from their team, until I get a real game plan. Until then, I will act. I have set a 48-hour window for this issue until someone comes up with a good plan other than "we need six more months." If that's the right plan, I'll do it. No problem, I don't care at all, I fully agree to relinquish control. I really don't want to be involved in this anymore. But now, the situation I'm facing is: my reputation has been destroyed, that's okay, I've become a government target, and possibly more. And my only leverage point is that I hold this money. So this is not a simple decision, it can't just be "give the money to someone else." It's not that kind of story.

Hayden Davis: Firm Believer in Milei's Integrity

Coffeezilla: No, I understand, I understand what you're saying. Indeed, this is not a simple story. When we talk about my advice, the first thing I said was: This is a problem to be solved slowly, whatever you do, it should be done slowly. You shouldn't rush into action. That's why I said that injecting money directly into the market won't solve all your problems. This is equivalent to giving money away. I do think you should handle this issue carefully. But when you say that if we refund, people will come after me, what I mean is, if you eventually find a trustworthy third party, that will alleviate your concerns about your family being kidnapped, pressured to pay. Because you actually don't have money to give them.

That's another issue. But I understand what you mean, that in a way, the 100 million you currently hold is your way of trying to find an answer for yourself. Because Javier Milei has clearly tried to distance himself from you. At first, he said he was part of your team, but then he tried to distance himself from everyone. No one opposes this. Of course, I won't say that Javier Milei knew about this project and supported it. I think he regrets supporting this project, but that doesn't change the fact that he did support this project, and indeed it was approved by him.

But there is a question, which is, "How should you handle this money?" I just want to say, I think you should really consider the unfair aspect: the injustice that has already happened is undisputed. So, when you want to clean up this mess, although it is tempting, to find that simple solution. The simple solution is to reinvest the money back into the market, saying, "This is not my problem anymore, go gamble, you gamblers." But I think the fairer way, also the more difficult to criticize, more responsible way, is to find a way to share the losses, find a way to give this money to people, and do it slowly. Because I think given the size of this money, it must be done this way. But I also admit, I am not standing in your shoes, I don't want to stand in your shoes. When you say I can help, I think it sounds like a nightmare, I don't want to inherit your $100 million problem, but I do hope people can get their money back. So I can only give the advice that I think is fairest, you must make the decision and bear the consequences. This is your burden.

Hayden Davis: But I also want to clarify, like, this is my burden because nobody told me what to do, right? I am in this extreme situation, that's what I think people can't understand, but the decisions I made were on behalf of the Argentine government, and they have already disassociated themselves from this project. I have no responsibility. If they want a refund, I will do it. If you can understand what I mean, this is an impossible scenario.

Coffeezilla: They didn't give you any guidance at all? They didn't give you any direction whatsoever?

Hayden Davis: No one told me what to do. Zero, absolutely none.

Coffeezilla: Well, I think Milei definitely panicked because of his own situation.

Hayden Davis: Yes, obviously because of...

Coffeezilla: He might be impeached. I'm not sure if he will be impeached, but there will definitely be proceedings.

Hayden Davis: He might not be impeached, but he'll definitely come very close.

Coffeezilla: This is damaging to him.

Hayden Davis: Of course, it's very damaging to him. I am a staunch supporter of Milei, I believe he is absolutely honest and not corrupt. I think there are many people in Argentina who want him to step down so they can regain control of the corrupt system.

Hayden Davis: Anyway, my point is, this scenario is simply unworkable. I feel like a sacrificial lamb now. I won't benefit from it; it has destroyed all my reputation, my whole self is exposed on the internet, I don't know what to do. I'm just a promoter. This is the craziest part, I'm not even the issuer, I'm not part of the team either.

Coffeezilla: Well, when you talk about the team, who are the team members?

Hayden Davis: Kip is a team member. He's the one who should be managing this project team.

Coffeezilla: Oh, I see. But you're in charge of the coin issuance, while the one managing the funds should be...

Hayden Davis: From my perspective, I'm the launch strategist; I just represent the team in making decisions. Yes, I make the decisions they want to make.

Hayden Davis: I'm not saying, I'm not a "behind-the-scenes schemer," thinking about how to make money from it. I'm here to integrate these projects, promote each other, grow and become something useful. That's the only reason I started doing these things. I'm stuck in the middle; there are many things I don't have a say in. In most cases, I'm just an executor.

Coffeezilla: We have to admit, you have indeed been able to earn millions of dollars from these projects in most cases, right? We can't deny that.

Hayden Davis: Of course, I didn't do this for free. I couldn't possibly say I did it for free.

Coffeezilla: Alright, alright. I'm just confirming that you're not trying to paint yourself as a victim. I do think your situation is indeed terrible, but from a financial point of view...

Hayden Davis: Oh, I am definitely a victim in this situation. I don't intend to make any money from this, but of course, I won't say I'm not making anything.

Coffeezilla: How do we know then? This is also my concern regarding issues like "rug pulls." You know, as I mentioned, I can track the blockchain; I think I might be one of the top 1% because most people don't know how to. Even if you asked me to find all the people involved in a rug pull, it would require a significant amount of time, which I simply don't have; it's practically impossible because there are too many transactions, and the data is too complex. What I'm trying to say is, when you say, "I won't benefit from this," how can you prove that you're not secretly taking a few million for yourself? It's entirely possible. I'm not accusing you of doing that; I'm not saying you are doing that. But when money is flowing so quickly when you have access to so much funding, and there's also side wallet sniping, oh, this is to protect the project, how can you be sure that this money won't end up in your pockets?

Hayden Davis: I feel like you can take other projects as examples to prove this point. I think, in this project's case, because people are targeting my family, and because the president is involved, it's an entirely different game, to be honest. I'm not interested in profiting from this at all; it could threaten my life or harm my family. So, this is different from a situation where Argentine drug dealers are after you or threats from elsewhere. I don't want any association with this project, nor do I want to make any money from it. So, you can see this in any way you want, but I think this is a different situation.

Coffeezilla: Interesting. Look, I think you are an intriguing figure in some ways. You know my views on meme coins; I won't overly condemn you, although I disagree. I also disagree with rug pulls and many other things. But I find you interesting because you represent the "behind-the-scenes" aspect. You have seen the inner workings of some of the biggest projects in this world.

MELANIA Coin. What do ordinary people need to know? Just like you said, oh, you know, people should... What are the things behind these projects? How much did the team earn? What is the real insider information? You know, we would appreciate if you really think people should know these things, you should tell them. What is your take on these matters, and what is the real inside story of these projects?

TRUMP, MELANIA, LIBRA: Big Projects Are an Insider's Game

Hayden Davis: I think the best example would have to be TRUMP's project, because I know it not only raised a lot of funds but also made the most money. I think that is the best example, to be honest. You know? You know people could get in at half a billion dollars.

Coffeezilla: You're saying people also sniped into that coin?

Hayden Davis: Not exactly, I mean, before it was released, some individuals got a special buying opportunity at some private dinner, right?

Coffeezilla: Wait, wait, who provided this opportunity? Who gave it?

Hayden Davis: It was some people at a crypto event in Washington.

Coffeezilla: If this is true, I don't know if this is true, but if this is true...

Hayden Davis: I mean, big projects like TRUMP, MELANIA, LIBRA, they are an insider's game. It's like an unregulated casino. If you are a retail trader thinking you can make money from a meme coin, you better study well. This is how Pump Fund works; first, insiders know, put money in, price pumps, and then who ends up losing money? Who are the rules of the game for? Every single project is a game. There is not a single one that isn't. The only exception is the ones that are totally dead, where just a few people decide to take them over.

Whether it's TRUMP, MELANIA, LIBRA, or any other big project, it can all be seen as a game. It's like going to a casino, you know? Those are the rules of the game. I originally thought these meme coins would become a useful tool, become a huge cross-promotion, a fun partnership, building much tighter social connections through financial means. But now it's obviously not. I don't even want to keep doing these now, don't even know how to. My launch strategy has refined a lot. Even today, despite so much hate, there are still 20 people asking me, when are you doing this project? It's crazy, but that's the game. It is an unregulated game.

Coffeezilla: Do you think this is a mistake? Do you think opening the floodgates to this kind of thing is a mistake? Because you basically said this is a bad idea.

Hayden Davis: I think most people would agree, yes. Just like, you know, three days ago I had a different view. My current view is that I am very supportive of removing everything from the regulatory market, but I now realize that it is also another game. I think it's an insider's game. Whether it's political figures like Pelosi or certain people in the stock market, it's an insider's game, just in another form, and people have to be more careful. But the capital market is an insider's game. The whole market is like this, and I will never be convinced that it is not manipulated. Banks spend hundreds of millions of dollars each year doing illegal things because that way they can earn more money. Otherwise, I could go on and on.

Coffeezilla: Well, yes, I just want to point out that if your argument about the capital market is "it is being controlled," then you are actually providing more evidence for increased regulation rather than less regulation. You wouldn't see a rigged game and then say, hey, everyone, let's get rid of all the rules that were originally meant to prevent it from being rigged, right?

Hayden Davis: Then you have to trust regulators, and most regulators are bought off, which has been proven time and time again. Because...

Coffeezilla: But again, seeing the conclusion of the world's problems is not "you realize the brakes don't work," and then say, "Hey, the brake manufacturer is bought off, so let's just not have brakes," but it is necessary to find ways to address the problem, promote more regulation, and establish more rules. Saying "it's all rigged" is not the kind of counterattack people think it is, do you understand my point?

Hayden Davis: Of course. But to me, those things are actually irrelevant because fundamentally, those who have the most funds, the most resources, and the most control are always the insiders, in any market. It's true in any field, they always win, never lose. This rule is universally applicable.

Coffeezilla: I can't argue with that.

Hayden Davis: So, like I tell people about meme coins, meme coins are unregulated, highly volatile. There are insiders, snipers, crazy operations inside. In fact, those at the top are most concerned about these things. Just like I talked to some people about, although I don't intend to reveal their names, they are not actually bad people, they are all trying to figure out how to do it. Most people are working very hard to figure out how to make this thing sustainable. But no one is doing it right, no one is doing it right. And I am convinced that huge projects like LIBRA will help create structure. But, you know, I didn't get those calls, they all disappeared when things got tough. So, I thought, "Forget it."

In fact, I have a lot to lose. I have a family, and there are many things in my life that I could lose, including my reputation, and so on. So I thought, whatever. I'll go all out, anyway, some people said not to talk to you, said you would mess me up. At that time, I thought, buddy, you are a rational person, let's talk and see how it goes. That was my only choice, either go all out, face the consequences, or don't go for it, forever be called a fraud, but I know I'm not.

Coffeezilla: I do agree with what you just said, no matter how many issues there are, it is far better to make your position clear than to let everyone guess and have others tell your story. I generally think this is the right thing to do. You know, I'm not unwilling to tell the truth. I am not trying to fix anyone's image, nor do I intend to. I just want to tell the story as it really happened. So when I play this video, I will broadcast the entire content, except for the part you told me not to. I won't edit, I will present it in its entirety, so that everyone can see your side of the story.

I think you are much more transparent than many people in this situation, although they may also be very afraid. When you say "people disappeared," I think they are afraid, like Javier Milei might be afraid due to reputation issues, I think Kip's Julian is also afraid due to reputation issues, partly because he was first seen as the villain. You know, there are many people here who are very scared. But I think it's a good thing that you can tell your story and answer these questions. Now, I don't think what's happening here is good, but I think your honest attitude is helpful. So I want to thank you for that.

Hayden Davis: I want to say a few things, I don't know if I need to summarize, but I want to emphasize a few points. First, I just want to reiterate, not only because I believe in this, but also because it needs to be said: Javier doesn't understand cryptocurrency at all. I think he understands a little, I think he's smart, and he also knows some things about blockchain, but I don't think he realizes what he's done. So I want to say that, I fully support him, I think he is the savior of one of the most corrupt countries in the world, a country that has the opportunity to become less corrupt. So, I want to say that.

Second, I share this story out of some kind of hope. I didn't expect to share it to this extent, but what I think needs to be made clear is: just because there is a narrative of "all the KOLs," I don't know if you consider yourself a KOL, maybe you don't think so, but all of you are making money through sharing content or earning from trades, these are the two ways you make money, right? Or maybe it's through brand endorsements and the like. These things do not matter; ultimately because you are constantly spreading content. And your content, in this situation, has had a huge impact on my family and put me in great danger.

Even though I am not the main character here, and I don't want to be, that's why I've always stood in the position of a facilitator. So I hope people can understand this: I don't need to be a victim, I'm not. But I hope people can have some empathy because I may need security in the foreseeable future, I may face great difficulties, which I don't want. I did this 100% without receiving any money from this transaction. I am doing this as an advisor to Milei, and I hope to further advance other conversations, drive other blockchain technologies, and promote other projects through this.

I don't care how much money this transaction can make, others, of course, I can't say I haven't made money from it, that would be silly. But in the end, no matter how you release this content, no matter how you paraphrase it, I at least hope there can be a little light shining on one fact: I am not a scammer, and I don't think LIBRA is a dead project. In fact, I believe Milei will support it. By the way, we'll know tomorrow or the day after tomorrow. But I bet he will support it. I think in his current predicament, supporting it is more beneficial for him.

Coffeezilla: Getting back to my main question, assuming a hundred million dollars could find the right person. The problem lies in the sniper, this kind of covert sniper, you basically said someone asked you to do this, right?

Hayden Davis: Yes, what I mean is, well, this thing is quite complicated. So this should be a longer story.

Coffeezilla: Did you benefit from these snipes? I think that's the question everyone is asking: are you launching a project? Do you know the project will launch, and then you benefit from it through super early investments, making money?

Hayden Davis: No. So the answer is I currently don't benefit from it, to be honest, I don't know either. These are seen as financial assets. Again, I want to emphasize that many people do not understand the complexity of these coin launches, especially when you initiate these launches, you are competing with some of the most powerful snipers in the world, who will easily make 10, 20, 30 million from these large projects and then walk away. And within seconds, they will dump these assets, they will sell based on their own will, not following any dynamic or concentrated liquidity provider (DLMM or CLMM) strategy, just "well, here's a billion dollars in trading volume, this won't affect the coin price", not considering anything, they just want to dump.

So one way to curb this behavior, even if you can say this is...well, no problem, is to try to get the token launched with the help of snipers so that there is a higher market cap in the market to allow you to enter early, and the retail investors don't see this opportunity at all. Retail investors always see it ten minutes later when the price has already risen tenfold, twentyfold. So we are also trying to help retail investors, but no one sees this. Everyone just sees "oh, insiders are manipulating" or "oh, it's being sniped." It's actually much more complex than imagined. People only see the profit, not the reality. The goal of each of these projects is to achieve one to two years. No team has the mentality of "we have to make big money from the start." So I want to make this point, whether anyone believes it or not, this is 100% a fact.

Coffeezilla: I just feel like if you really want to increase the market cap, I think you can design your liquidity pool in a way that the price can reflect that, or you don't necessarily have to do one-sided liquidity. There are many ways you can do this without needing to...

Hayden Davis: They're not all one-sided.

Coffeezilla: Right, well, I mean, you can create a structure, I think in this structure, a lot of things can happen without needing to snipe.

Hayden Davis: But the intent is to do so. Unfortunately, no matter what you do, it will still be sniped. You can launch at a $1 billion market cap, you can launch at $500 million, $200 million, or $300 million market cap, they will all be sniped.

Coffeezilla: It's kind of like this, well, I finally came up with an analogy: You're basically like a bank, right? And then you say, "Hey, there's money in the bank, come on, everyone can come play." But then you also say, "I'm worried someone will get to my bank vault first, so I'll grab the money first myself, and then put it back later." And then we all just watch with wide eyes, well, are you going to put the money back? It becomes a weird trust game that we have to play.

Hayden Davis: It does sound really much like crypto, but can, well, yes, I think that's not the worst description. Alright, every such launch is like that. Everyone is wondering: How do we fairly launch these projects without getting sniped? Is it through massive pre-launch marketing? In that case, all snipers will know. Or is it through a stealth launch, and some people still figure it out in the end? I don’t know. Things just always happen this way. You and others haven't given me a concrete answer, that's why I've been blamed all along. But no one has proposed a solution, telling me, "How should we do it, and is it meaningful?" Because everything is on the blockchain, to some extent, it can be seen.

Coffeezilla: Everything is indeed on the blockchain. Well, I've also mentioned my views on meme coins before.

I think you've covered most of the important points. I want to thank you for sharing your story. As I said, I may not entirely agree with your views, but I believe you have shed light on many important issues that haven't been touched on before. I think this will be an important interview, and I'm very grateful.

Hayden Davis: Alright, take care, bye.

「Original Article Link」

欢迎加入律动 BlockBeats 官方社群：

Telegram 订阅群：https://t.me/theblockbeats

Telegram 交流群：https://t.me/BlockBeats_App

Twitter 官方账号：https://twitter.com/BlockBeatsAsia