KEYTAKEAWAYS
- Monad’s airdrop distributed 30% of total MON supply to 230,000 users, aiming for fairness but sparking debate over allocation and transparency.
- Community backlash grew as many felt KOLs and influencers benefited more than active users, undermining trust in the project’s fairness.
- MON’s price fell over 50% after launch, reflecting sell pressure, weak utility, and uncertainty about long-term value beyond speculation.
CONTENT
Monad’s MON airdrop sparked excitement and controversy, with complex allocation rules, community backlash over fairness, and volatile price performance after launch.
When Monad finally opened its MON airdrop claim portal, it felt like a turning point — but the aftermath has been messy, controversial, and full of tension.
Here’s a full picture of what the airdrop promised, how the community reacted, and how MON’s price has behaved since launch.
AIRDROP DETAILS AND ALLOCATION MECHANISM
Monad officially launched its airdrop claim portal on October 14, 2025, aiming to convert its testnet momentum into real token distribution. The total MON supply is set at 100 billion tokens, and the team allocated 30% of that for community claims, with a 30-month vesting schedule to limit immediate sell pressure.
Recipients were divided into five key categories: Monad Community, On-chain Users, Crypto Community, Crypto Contributors & Curious, and Monad Builders. Users who met multiple subcriteria could stack their allocations.
In total, Monad planned to distribute tokens to roughly 5,500 active community members and about 225,000 users from the broader crypto ecosystem. This included DEX traders, long-term NFT holders, DeFi protocol users, and others who had shown activity across Web3.
To reduce Sybil farming, Monad introduced anti-Sybil filters that downweighted low-value repetitive transactions and flagged suspicious wallets. However, critics argued that these filters were overly opaque and inconsistent. The claim window is scheduled to close on November 3, giving participants about three weeks to claim their tokens.
COMMUNITY BACKLASH AND KEY COMPLAINTS
Despite the effort to design a fair system, community dissatisfaction was immediate. The most frequent criticisms centered on fairness, transparency, and the imbalance between retail users and influencers.
First, many claimed that the airdrop was too diluted. With hundreds of thousands of eligible addresses, individual rewards were so small that users felt the gesture was symbolic rather than meaningful.
Second, users accused Monad of favoring KOLs and major influencers instead of rewarding active community members who had genuinely interacted with the testnet and contributed early on. This created the impression that visibility mattered more than contribution.
Third, transparency issues deepened the frustration. The project never released a full explanation of its selection formula, and several users said eligibility rules appeared to change mid-process. Some even described themselves as being “counter-farmed,” despite months of active participation.
Finally, as soon as tokens were claimable, the market saw heavy sell pressure. Many recipients instantly dumped their airdrops, echoing a broader trend in which over 70% of airdropped tokens underperform after distribution.
PRICE PERFORMANCE AFTER AIRDROP
From the moment trading began, MON’s price displayed sharp volatility. In early pre-market trading, MON hovered near $0.08 with strong speculative interest. On Binance perpetuals, the token opened as high as $0.13 but soon fell to around $0.06–$0.07, where it has struggled to stabilize.
Across aggregators like CoinMarketCap, MON currently trades near $0.0165 — a dramatic drop from its early highs. CoinGecko also reports thin liquidity and subdued market activity. The divergence between perpetual contract prices and spot values highlights how limited liquidity and speculative leverage have distorted short-term price action.
In short, the token has surrendered most of its initial momentum. Early excitement has been replaced by uncertainty, and the community’s skepticism now weighs heavily on sentiment.
FINAL THOUGHTS
Monad’s airdrop was ambitious, aiming to recognize community loyalty while expanding its ecosystem’s reach.
Yet the execution exposed familiar fault lines in token distribution design. Too many recipients diluted rewards, while giving weight to influencers alienated core supporters,Monad has cut off all testnet users, leaving no room for error. This feast has almost nothing to do with ordinary retail investors.
The result is a story that many in crypto know too well: a hype-fueled launch followed by disappointment and selling pressure. Unless Monad can demonstrate strong use cases for MON, expand its real ecosystem, and rebuild community trust, this airdrop might be remembered more for controversy than success.
