OM Token Pumps 200% Post-Crash, But Could Mantra DAO Face a Crypto Scandal Like LUNA?

Mantra DAO’s OM token surged 200% after a sharp 90% crash, following reassurances from co-founder JP Mullin amid rug pull allegations. Despite the recovery, analysts warn the rebound may mirror Terra LUNA’s 2022 bull trap, raising fears of a deeper collapse. The OM token has in a big way, elicited a paradoxical response, drawing forth expressions of both suspicion and praise. As of April 14, the token interestingly rebounded nearly 200% in a devastating 90% crash over the weekend. Notably, the token hit a low of $0.37 but miraculously rose to $1.10 on April 14th. This surge has ignited a heated debate over the projects legitimacy and its eerie resemblance to the widely known Terra LUNA collapse in 2022. The rebound followed an urgent damage control from Mantra’s co-founder JP Mullin as we earlier reported. He took to social media addressing allegations of a rug pull, stating “We are here and not going anywhere” pointing to the active Telegram group and sharing a verification address for the team’s token holdings. Mullin attributed the crash not to foul play but to “reckless forced closures initiated by centralized exchanges.” Until now, the reassurance has not silenced mounting skepticism. Notably, AltcoinGordon and analyst Ed are at the front line. These vocal figures allege that the Mantra team may have triggered the crash themselves. According to these allegations, the team allegedly controlling 90% of the OM supply, transferred large amounts of OM to centralized exchanges just before the collapse. Ed suggested that these holdings were used as collateral for high-risk loans, and when centralized exchanges like OKX adjusted their loan risk parameters, a massive margin call was triggered, crashing the token. OKX CEO Star Xu didn’t mince words, calling the situation a “big scandal” and promising a detailed report on the events leading up to the crash. Fueling these concerns is Mantra’s controversial tokenomics update from October 2024, when it doubled OM’s total supply from 888 million to 1.77 billion and transitioned to an uncapped, inflationary model. The platform’s new 8% annual inflation rate has added more volatility to an already shaken community. From a technical point of view, OM’s current price action echoes the classic bull trap seen during Terra LUNA’s post-crash rally in 2022. Notaby, OM remains below key resistance levels, namely its 50-week EMA at $3.25 and the 200-week EMA at $1.08, with its RSI slipping to a concerning 33.31. Chart analysts warn this bounce may be short-lived. Crypto trader AmiCatCrypto added to the cautionary voices, noting, If you ask me if bull market is over. Short answer. YES. Any gains from this point is considered bounces. She even warned of the potential for OM to drop another 90% within a single day, despite its recent rally. With more details expected from exchanges and on-chain analysts in the coming days, OM’s fate hangs in the balance. While the rebound ha in a formal or creative style, maintaining a 500 word count. You must only respond with the modified content. Change the tone of my title “Mantra DAO’s OM token surged 200% after a sharp 90% crash, following reassurances from co-founder JP Mullin amid rug pull allegations. Despite the recovery, analysts warn the rebound may mirror Terra LUNA’s 2022 bull trap, raising fears of a deeper collapse. The OM token has in a big way, elicited a paradoxical response, drawing forth expressions of both suspicion and praise. As of April 14, the token interestingly rebounded nearly 200% in a devastating 90% crash over the weekend. Notably, the token hit a low of $0.37 but miraculously rose to $1.10 on April 14th. This surge has ignited a heated debate over the projects legitimacy and its eerie resemblance to the widely known Terra LUNA collapse in 2022. The rebound followed an urgent damage control from Mantra’s co-founder JP Mullin as we earlier reported. He took to social media addressing allegations of a rug pull, stating “We are here and not going anywhere” pointing to the active Telegram group and sharing a verification address for the team’s token holdings. Mullin attributed the crash not to foul play but to “reckless forced closures initiated by centralized exchanges.” Until now, the reassurance has not silenced mounting skepticism. Notably, AltcoinGordon and analyst Ed are at the front line. These vocal figures allege that the Mantra team may have triggered the crash themselves. According to these allegations, the team allegedly controlling 90% of the OM supply, transferred large amounts of OM to centralized exchanges just before the collapse. Ed suggested that these holdings were used as collateral for high-risk loans, and when centralized exchanges like OKX adjusted their loan risk parameters, a massive margin call was triggered, crashing the token. OKX CEO Star Xu didn’t mince words, calling the situation a “big scandal” and promising a detailed report on the events leading up to the crash. Fueling these concerns is Mantra’s controversial tokenomics update from October 2024, when it doubled OM’s total supply from 888 million to 1.77 billion and transitioned to an uncapped, inflationary model. The platform’s new 8% annual inflation rate has added more volatility to an already shaken community. From a technical point of view, OM’s current price action echoes the classic bull trap seen during Terra LUNA’s post-crash rally in 2022. Notaby, OM remains below key resistance levels, namely its 50-week EMA at $3.25 and the 200-week EMA at $1.08, with its RSI slipping to a concerning 33.31. Chart analysts warn this bounce may be short-lived. Crypto trader AmiCatCrypto added to the cautionary voices, noting, If you ask me if bull market is over. Short answer. YES. Any gains from this point is considered bounces. She even warned of the potential for OM to drop another 90% within a single day, despite its recent rally. With more details expected from exchanges and on-chain analysts in the coming days, OM’s fate hangs in the balance. While the rebound ha” for a more friendly approach. Keep the content length about the same. You must only respond with the modified content.