This week, on East 8 Time, on-chain monitoring agency disclosed that the address marked by Onchain Lens as 77DsB has cumulatively sold large amounts of approximately 2.07 billion PUMP, exchanging for about 4.55 million USDC. This series of actions has struck a nerve in the market sentiment. On one hand, the concentrated monetization by such a large whale in a short period has raised intuitive concerns regarding the short-term price and liquidity pressure on PUMP; on the other hand, data shows that this address still holds approximately 1.676 billion PUMP with a book value of about 3.38 million USD, and the unliquidated chips have become an uncertain variable hanging over the market. Under the magnification of several Chinese media outlets like Planet Daily and Golden Finance, the movements of this address have quickly risen to the center of public opinion, leading to heated debates about how much further PUMP can drop and whether the sell pressure has been fully released.
2 billion dumped for 4.55 million USDC's chain reaction
● Breakdown of the sale scale: According to publicly available on-chain data, the 77DsB address recently engaged in continuous operations, cumulatively selling about 2.07 billion PUMP for a total of approximately 4.55 million USDC, reflecting a typical “staggered reduction + stable asset repositioning” approach. Although the specific transaction times and market conditions for each transaction are not fully detailed in the public data, the total amount and price indicate a concentrated offloading with a clear realization target, which is enough to change the short-term chip structure.
● Impact on circulation and transactions: Given the current circulation scale and daily trading volume of PUMP, a concentrated sale at the level of several billion is bound to put pressure on the price fluctuation range and order depth within the day or several days, amplifying slippage and impact costs. For market-making and arbitrage funds, such large liquidation often means a need to reassess order density and risk exposure, while ordinary participants may more easily characterize this entire process as “dumping” when they see massive sell orders and K-line volume decline.
● Amplification of emotions and panic expectations: Planet Daily quoted market views stating, “Large single-day reductions trigger concerns about subsequent sell pressure,” capturing the community's immediate reaction—focusing not just on the already sold 2.07 billion, but beginning to speculate on “what if there's another round.” In a meme-driven scenario led by emotions, this imagination of potential continued selling often drives follow-up reductions and short-term hedging more than the already occurred sell-offs.
Still holding 1.6 billion post-sales: Shadow of chips hanging over the market
● Volume of remaining chips: Although 77DsB has converted approximately 2.07 billion PUMP into 4.55 million USDC, on-chain data shows that the address still holds about 1.676 billion PUMP, equating to approximately 3.38 million USD at current market price. This volume, on the dimension of any single address, is sufficient to influence expectations, meaning the whale has realized part of the profit while still retaining a sufficiently large stake at the table.
● Comparison between liquidation in batches and one-time clearance: Market imagination is naturally divided into two paths—if the remaining 1.676 billion choose to continue to offload slowly in stages and at different price levels, the market may remain in a long-term “capped” suppressed state, with each larger on-chain transfer interpreted as new sell pressure; conversely, a one-time clearance could lead to extreme volatility and a panic sell-off in the short term, but it also opens up the potential scenario of “bad news being fully priced in.” Both paths are not determined yet, but they have been pre-written into the traders' emotional script.
● Position structure and risk pricing: Structurally, “partial profits realized + still large positions held” will make short-term bulls and market-making funds more sensitive to any on-chain signals from this address. On one hand, the realized 4.55 million USDC provides the whale with the flexibility to “buy back at lower prices” or “continue reducing positions”; on the other hand, the secondary market will additionally factor in the potential selling pressure premium of 1.676 billion when quoting, leading buyers willing to take up the position to demand higher price discounts, while market makers tend to narrow their active exposure, manifesting as thinner depth and amplified volatility.
The Pump.fun associated address marked and the public opinion magnifying glass
● Source of third-party labels: Onchain Lens and other on-chain monitoring tools currently mark 77DsB as an address associated with Pump.fun, a piece of information later cited by multiple data and sentiment accounts to explain the context of its holdings and sales of PUMP. It is crucial to emphasize that these labels essentially belong to a part of the third-party labeling system, based on characteristics such as historical on-chain interactions and funding paths, rather than being an official statement from the project party.
● Amplification of "associated addresses" in meme narratives: In the public opinion environment surrounding meme assets, “suspected project party/associated address liquidation” is often more narrative-driven than “ordinary whale reductions” and is easier for narrative accounts and communities to amplify. Once an address is tagged with an association, the public tends to extrapolate a whole set of possible motivations from the project party, from profit realization to strategic shifts, even if these extrapolations lack direct evidence, they are sufficient to shape market sentiment and secondary pricing logic in a short time.
● Cautiously approach unverified relationships: Currently, publicly available information has not obtained official confirmation of the specific relationship between Pump.fun and 77DsB, and notions such as “project party address” and “custodial address” are still in the stage of verification or based on on-chain signs speculation. In the absence of concrete disclosure, treating these labels as established facts can easily lead to misinterpretation of the nature of events and even affect regulatory sensitivity and community trust structures. Therefore, readers need to maintain necessary skepticism and independent judgment when interpreting any “associated” narratives.
On-chain games and emotional trading under the media spotlight
● Accelerator of public opinion: Media outlets such as Planet Daily, Golden Finance, and others focused on the operations of 77DsB almost simultaneously, moving this round of selling behavior from “a record of on-chain data” to “a hot topic worthy of attention across the network.” When mainstream information sources concentrate on the funding movement of the same address, the event's dissemination path is greatly compressed, lowering the threshold for ordinary participants to access information, while emotions are more easily unified and guided.
● Resonance between media and emotional accounts: After the large on-chain actions are reported by the media, emotional KOLs, speculative communities, and market information channels often reprocess them with more impactful language to restate narratives like “whales dumping” and “sell pressure on the horizon.” This multi-layered retelling accelerates the contagion of follow-up reductions and panic emotions, resulting in some holders without a clear selling plan potentially being swept out of the market due to the impression that “everyone is running,” further weakening the market's liquidity.
● Utilizing narratives for short-term games: Meanwhile, some more aggressive funds may actively use the public sentiment around “whale dumping” for emotional trading—initiating dumping and causing increased selling in the early stages of negative sentiment, then replenishing at low prices during extreme panic; or conversely, after confirming the large sell-offs, capitalizing on short-term rebounds as “bad news being fully priced in.” For the secondary market, on-chain data, media narratives, and funding games intertwine within a short time, often resulting in dramatic price fluctuations and sudden depth withdrawals.
Is the whale's reduction merely profit realization or a sign of cooling prospects?
● Approaching from behavioral patterns rather than inferring motivations: In the absence of statements from the parties involved, directly speculating on the internal motivations of 77DsB is neither rigorous nor grounded. A more reasonable approach is to interpret its market implications from common behavioral patterns of large holders. For huge unrealized profit chips, appropriately reducing positions during high volatility, recouping part of USDC to lower overall position risk, is a typical “profit realization + risk management” action, and does not necessarily equate to a complete denial of the long-term prospects for the asset.
● Two mainstream interpretations: Currently, there are roughly two market interpretations surrounding this round of reductions: one sees it as “safe realization of profits,” believing that realizing part of the profit while meme enthusiasm and prices are high is a rational trade, while retaining 1.676 billion PUMP indicates continued participation in potential upsides; the other decodes it as “caution or even pessimism towards future market directions,” suggesting that large holders typically only sell at such scales when they perceive a decrease in cost-effectiveness. Both interpretations circulate but each lacks decisive evidence, relying more on each participant's risk preference and time perspective.
● Focusing on observable signals rather than a single event: A more robust approach is to view this selling as a starting point requiring subsequent data validation, rather than an endpoint. Investors should focus on monitoring: whether 77DsB continues to reduce holdings, whether other whale addresses appear to synchronize or follow with selling, and the market's actual absorption strength and price response during the selling pressure, rather than absolutizing each large liquidation as “a top signal” or “a precursor to collapse.”
What to watch next: filtering on-chain traces and narrative noise
● Consolidating multiple impacts: Overall, the 77DsB address has cumulatively sold approximately 2.07 billion PUMP for about 4.55 million USDC, while still holding 1.676 billion PUMP, represents a significant impact on current liquidity expectations, community confidence, and project narratives surrounding PUMP. On the liquidity front, the short-term sell pressure and shadows of potential continued reductions have led some market makers and follow-on funds to choose to observe; on the emotional level, the narrative template of “whale dumping + associated addresses” reinforces panic; on the narrative level, discussions regarding the project party’s stance and long-term value have been forced to arise early.
● Key observation dimensions: In the coming time, what truly deserves close attention is not the daily price decline, but rather deeper structural signals: firstly, the subsequent on-chain transfer path of 77DsB—whether it continues to transfer towards trading venues or remains relatively quiet; secondly, whether the pace of sell-off accelerates or slows down, whether the sell pressure is concentrated or gradually diminishing; thirdly, the market absorption strength, that is, after each visible on-chain sell-off, whether buy orders can quickly absorb them and if prices exhibit elasticity. These data will provide more valuable references than emotional comments.
● Establishing risk awareness between data, labels, and narratives: In the face of third-party associated labels from Onchain Lens, intensive media reporting, and emotional fermentation on social platforms, participants need to deliberately establish a set of “filters”: distinguishing verifiable on-chain data from unverified “associated” statements, viewing the behavior of a single address as layered within the broad fundamentals of the entire ecosystem. Only by not treating unverified relationships as established facts can the market achieve more rational risk pricing in volatility rather than being driven by emotion through one excessive reaction after another.
Join our community to discuss and become stronger together!
Official Telegram community: https://t.me/aicoincn
AiCoin Chinese Twitter: https://x.com/AiCoinzh
OKX benefit group: https://aicoin.com/link/chat?cid=l61eM4owQ
Binance benefit group: https://aicoin.com/link/chat?cid=ynr7d1P6Z
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。
