Sonic destroys 16 million airdropped tokens, can it quell the community's doubts about "soft rug"?

On January 18th, the Sonic team announced the destruction of over 16,020,000 unclaimed first-season Airdrop S tokens. This move was executed through a fully permissionless smart contract, aiming to enhance token scarcity. However, in the current trust crisis caused by “soft rug” accusations against the project, whether simple token burning can restore market confidence remains uncertain.

The True Background Behind the Token Burn

Scale and Method of Destruction

The total number of tokens burned by Sonic this time is 16,027,929.41 S, representing a portion of the airdrop total. The destruction was carried out automatically via a smart contract, without manual intervention, ensuring transparency on a technical level. However, it should be noted that burning only adjusts the token supply side and does not address underlying operational issues of the project.

Market Environment Before the Burn

According to the latest data, as of January 17th, the S token price was $0.081, with a market cap of $307.89 million. But behind this price lies deep market disappointment: since the token swap, S has plummeted by 91.8%. This is not just price fluctuation but a direct rejection of the project team’s operational decisions.

The Core Market Doubt: Trust Crisis

Meaning of “Soft Rug” Allegations

According to relevant information, community criticism of Sonic centers on “soft rug.” This concept refers to projects that, while not outright rug pulls, harm investor interests through certain decisions (such as unreasonable token distribution, opaque community communication, etc.) in a covert manner. Against this backdrop, Sonic’s actions have sparked further skepticism.

The Project Team’s Response

It is noteworthy that on January 16th, Sonic’s team consolidated the remaining airdrop distribution (about 92 million S) into a multi-signature wallet. Meanwhile, they shut down public discussions on Discord, switching to read-only mode. The official explanation was “streamlining communication channels,” but the community interpreted it as “gagging.” This shift in communication further deepened market distrust in the project.

The Actual Significance of Token Burning

From a Supply Perspective

Burning 16 million tokens indeed reduces circulating supply, which theoretically supports the price. However, in the current market environment, supply-side improvements cannot compensate for demand collapse.

From a Signaling Perspective

Burning unclaimed airdrop tokens can be seen as a form of “showing goodwill”—acknowledging that the airdrop distribution may have been excessive and proactively reducing supply. But in a context where trust in the project has already been broken, this signal has limited effect.

The Ecosystem’s Current State Is Not Optimistic

According to the latest data, Sonic’s on-chain performance is less than ideal:

The decline in TVL indicates users are withdrawing from the ecosystem, which reflects the project’s real situation more accurately than token price drops.

The Project Team’s Next Moves

On January 16th, Sonic’s team issued a statement saying, “We have operated for 1 year and will continue to provide the most advanced blockchain technology.” This statement aims to stabilize market expectations, but without concrete actions, its effectiveness is limited.

Summary

Burning 16 million tokens is essentially a technical operation—transparent and verifiable—but it cannot solve Sonic’s core problem: the loss of market trust. From the 91.8% price plunge, continuous TVL decline, to the community communication shutdown, these signals suggest that Sonic needs more than token burning. It requires actual ecosystem development, transparent communication, and clear development plans to rebuild confidence.

Currently, token burning appears more like a passive response rather than an active strategy. Future points of focus include whether the project’s ecosystem TVL can stabilize, whether the team will improve communication strategies, and whether market expectations for Sonic can truly be improved through these measures.