Author: Deep Tide TechFlow

If there are still newcomers entering the industry, then airdrops are likely their first stop.

From purely taking advantage of opportunities to the complex game between project parties and users, airdrops have gradually become a love-hate relationship for everyone.

For users, the love comes from the huge returns brought by successful airdrops, but the hate stems from complex rules, tedious tasks, and even opaque distribution mechanisms.

For projects, the love is that airdrops can still bring short-term traffic and attention, but the behavior of gaming the system and the decline in community trust also gives them headaches.

People can change.

After experiencing multiple rounds of bull and bear markets, crypto market users still have expectations for "free lunches," but their behavior has become more rational. Project parties have gradually realized that simple airdrops can no longer meet the needs of community building, and are turning to more complex and transparent distribution mechanisms.

For example, Hyperliquid's airdrop was highly praised for rewarding early users, while Redstone's airdrop faced strong community opposition due to a last-minute change in distribution ratios.

It's 2025 now; can airdrops still play their role?

Recently, Binance Research released a report titled "Where Are Our Airdrops Going?" which provides us with an in-depth perspective. By analyzing the current state, issues, and improvement directions of airdrops, it may help project parties and users find better solutions.

Deep Tide TechFlow has organized and summarized the core content of this report, with the main points as follows.

Key Points

• Although the airdrop model still has many shortcomings, its position in the industry cannot be ignored.

• Two popular categories of airdrops:

• Retroactive Airdrops: Mainly reward existing users by distributing tokens based on their historical behavior, aiming to enhance community loyalty.

• Engagement Airdrops: Attract new users and increase project exposure by notifying users in advance and setting task incentives. This is more suitable for early projects to capture market share and establish an initial user base.

• Areas for improvement:

• Clear distribution rules and standards help reduce user dissatisfaction and misunderstandings.

• Project parties need to listen more to the voices of the community.

• Avoid excessive resource allocation to internal teams or large holders to protect the interests of ordinary users.

• The introduction of on-chain monitoring tools and "Proof-of-Humanity" technology is expected to reduce airdrop gaming behavior, making airdrops fairer and more efficient.

Through these core points, the report provides us with a clear framework to help understand the current state of airdrops and potential future development directions.

From Simple Distribution to Complex Games

Since the first airdrop event in 2014, airdrops have been in the industry for 10 years.

The first notable airdrop was Auroracoin in 2014, aimed at promoting the national cryptocurrency to Icelandic residents. At that time, users only needed to enter their permanent resident ID on the Auroracoin website to receive tokens.

In comparison, Hyperliquid's HYPE airdrop (November 2024) may be one of the largest and best-rated airdrops to date, further solidifying airdrops as a powerful user engagement tool. With a peak valuation exceeding $10 billion, the HYPE token airdrop surpassed Uniswap, becoming the largest airdrop by peak price.

However, to counter the increase in witch attacks, project parties have also increased the complexity of obtaining airdrop eligibility.

Unlike early airdrops, current airdrops typically require users to complete multiple tasks, such as using testnets, participating in social media activities, engaging in governance, downloading mobile applications, and transferring funds across chains. These necessary actions often directly benefit the project, such as increasing on-chain revenue/activity or enhancing social media exposure.

Current airdrops can be divided into the following two parts.

Type 1: Retroactive Airdrops

Some earlier airdrops, such as Auroracoin, Uniswap, and StarkNet's airdrop, did not publicly disclose any relevant information before distributing the airdrop; the goal was to reward existing community users and enhance their loyalty.

Characteristics:

• More user-centric
• Typically executed by protocols that already have a large user base and market share.
• No need to use airdrops to kickstart an initial user base.

Applicable Scenarios: Mature protocols that aim to give back to existing users and strengthen community relationships.

Type 2: Engagement Airdrops

Incentivize users to participate in specific activities by informing them of upcoming token generation events.

Characteristics:

• More project-centric.
• Mainly used to attract new users and help projects gain initial market share.
• Often incentivize user behavior through point systems and other forms.

Typical cases: Redstone, Kaito, and Hyperliquid.

Applicable Scenarios:

Emerging projects that need to maintain competitiveness with competing protocols (which may also use token incentive mechanisms) through airdrops.

Recent Sentiment Analysis of Token Airdrops

To better understand the recent developments in airdrops, this report also utilized Grok AI to conduct a brief sentiment analysis of some significant airdrops over the past year and scored them.

Sources of sentiment analysis: Posts on X, including but not limited to community feedback, the ratio of positive to negative comments, interaction levels, and specific criticisms or praises.

Grok also reviewed official announcements, tokenomics, and airdrop eligibility criteria in online articles. Sentiment was classified as positive, negative, or mixed based on the dominant reaction.

Below is the original table from the report, translated using AI; some wording may be ambiguous, but the scoring values in the original table reflect the community's differing views on various airdrops, with higher scores indicating more positive sentiment.

Lessons Learned from Past Airdrops

Last-Minute Reduction of Distribution Ratios

Some crypto projects initially promised to allocate a certain percentage of tokens to the community but later reduced this ratio, reallocating tokens to insiders or project treasuries. Recently, the Redstone airdrop faced strong community opposition after the team reduced the community allocation ratio from 9.5% to 5% just before the token distribution date. Many community members deemed this action unfair.

Lessons Learned

• Clearly communicate token distribution ratios in advance: Clearly convey the token distribution plan before the Token Generation Event (TGE).
• Avoid last-minute changes: Try not to make temporary adjustments to distributions.
• Negotiate with stakeholders if necessary: If changes to the distribution ratio are indeed needed, avoid making unilateral decisions. Discussions should be held with key stakeholders (such as investors, the community, and exchanges) to ensure adequate communication.

Opaque Eligibility Standards and Mismatched Expectations

Some projects conveyed unclear standards for airdrop eligibility, leading to uneven reward distribution that failed to accurately reflect users' actual activities. The Scroll airdrop in October 2024 (distributing 7% of its total SCR token supply, or 70 million tokens) was criticized for its arbitrary snapshot mechanism and hidden rules.

Lessons Learned

• Clearly communicate distribution rules: Ensure rules are transparent to avoid excessive guessing by users, which often leads to mismatched expectations.
• Prevent witch attacks: Consider using on-chain monitoring tools or "Proof-of-Humanity" tools to reduce abuse.

Overweight Distribution to Insiders and KOLs

Many projects allocate a larger proportion of tokens to teams, investors, and venture capital firms (VCs), leaving a smaller share for the community. For example, in Kaito's airdrop in February 2025, 43.3% of the tokens were allocated to the team and investors, with only 10% going to the community, sparking public debate on X.

Some projects allocate large amounts of tokens to influencers, who may choose to sell immediately, diluting token value and harming the interests of genuine users. Reports indicate that Kaito also faced controversy for allocating a large number of tokens to influencers, who sold them shortly after the TGE, affecting token prices and undermining community trust.

Lessons Learned

• Be cautious with allocation ratios: Learn from the token distribution results of similarly sized or natured projects and pay attention to market reactions to distribution plans.
• Implement vesting periods and lock-up mechanisms: Applying vesting periods and token lock-ups for insiders and influencers can reduce early sell-off pressure after the TGE and better align their interests with the project's long-term goals.

Technical Barriers in the Claiming Process

Complex or flawed claiming processes can hinder users from receiving tokens, effectively reducing the payout amount and largely undermining the intended purpose of the airdrop claiming process.

For example, the Magic Eden airdrop in December 2024 attempted to promote its mobile wallet application through an airdrop, but reports indicated that feedback on bugs and unclear instructions on X led to user frustration rather than anticipation.

Lessons Learned

• Airdrop claiming is an important first touchpoint for many potential users. Ensure the process is smooth and convenient to increase the likelihood of user retention.

How Can Airdrops Improve?

Increase Transparency

• Set clear goals: Project teams need to establish clear objectives for airdrop or token incentive programs and ensure these goals align with the project's long-term vision.
• Clearly communicate goals: Through clear communication, align community behavior with project goals and vision, reducing dissatisfaction caused by inconsistent behavior weight distribution.

Enhance Community Engagement

• The community is the core competitive advantage of the project: Technology and products can iterate quickly, but community building requires time and patience. The long-term success of a project relies on a solid and loyal community.
• Balance transparency with engagement: Transparency is fundamental, but it is not enough on its own. Project teams need to engage the community more deeply in project development through interaction and feedback mechanisms, thereby enhancing a sense of belonging and loyalty.
• Challenges posed by user mobility: The open nature of the crypto industry lowers the switching costs for users, so projects must retain users through stronger community cohesion and a sense of belonging.

Increase Monitoring Mechanisms

Some projects (like LayerZero) have already partnered with on-chain analytics companies (like Nansen) to identify and revoke airdrop eligibility for "witch attackers" by analyzing on-chain data.

As technology advances, on-chain monitoring tools will become more sophisticated and widely used, making it easier for project teams to detect and eliminate bad behavior.

"Proof-of-Humanity" tools are expected to help prevent airdrop abuse in the future while protecting users' anonymity and privacy. Such tools may become key means to address the "gaming" problem of airdrops.

免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。