The license was just issued, and the scammers have already put the "official halo" on their heads. Recently, the Hong Kong Monetary Authority issued a statement warning against fraudulent tokens impersonating licensed issuers in the market, specifically reminding: Some are claiming to be associated with "license" and "bank cooperation," setting up a scam in the world of digital assets.
Among this batch of suspicious tokens, the two most eye-catching codenames are "HKDAP" and "HSBC." They claim in their promotions to be related to licensed institutions, trying to leverage the reputation of regulators and large banks to increase credibility. However, the Monetary Authority made a clear distinction in the announcement: These tokens using "HKDAP" or "HSBC" as codenames and claiming to be associated with licensed issuers are not issued by the relevant licensed issuers and have no affiliation with them, thus suspected of fraud or impersonation.
Ironically, not long ago, the Hong Kong Monetary Authority had just established a regulatory framework, issuing the first batch of relevant issuer licenses to Anchorpoint Financial Limited and The Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation Limited, seen as a critical step for Hong Kong in regulating virtual assets. By the time of this announcement, both institutions that actually received licenses had publicly emphasized: they have not yet issued any regulated token products in the market. In other words, any tokens circulating in the market claiming to be "Anchorpoint" or "HSBC regulated tokens" are all fakes, aimed at this freshly established "licensed" brand.
As the license just landed, counterfeit tokens came in
While the market was still discussing "who will become Hong Kong's first licensed issuers," the answer was already provided: Anchorpoint Financial Limited and The Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation Limited received the first batch of relevant issuer licenses issued by the Hong Kong Monetary Authority "recently." This step is seen as a key starting point for Hong Kong in regulating virtual assets and related tokens—the license framework has finally moved from paper to reality, and there are now identifiable protagonists in the regulatory story with concrete institutions.
But as the story began, supporting characters squeezed in. Shortly after the license framework was established, tokens claiming to be associated with these two licensed issuers and using "HKDAP" or "HSBC" as codenames immediately emerged in the market, deliberately packaging themselves as "new opportunities with some ties to licensed institutions." As the regulatory signboard was just hung on the wall, the scammers had already learned to print it on their promotional materials.
The Hong Kong Monetary Authority had to point out directly in the announcement: These tokens using "HKDAP" or "HSBC" as codenames and claiming to be related to licensed issuers are not issued by the licensed issuers and have no association with Anchorpoint and HSBC. While the regulatory authority clarified the facts, it also reminded the public to stay vigilant and pay attention to statements or press releases issued by the two licensed institutions—because so far, both institutions have clearly stated: they have not issued any regulated related token products in the market.
The gaps in between became the stage for scammers. On one side is the official narrative of "Hong Kong issuing the first batch of licenses," providing an image of "regulatory endorsement" to the market; on the other side is the reality where regulated products have not yet appeared, creating a natural information asymmetry. The gap between regulatory authority and market perception is utilized by illegal projects to spin narratives, fabricate connections, and create abbreviated codes—all while treating "obtaining a license" as a label that can be arbitrarily applied. The license just landed; the real regulated products haven't been able to come to market yet, and counterfeit tokens have already moved quickly to insert themselves into this new chapter of regulatory history.
From HKDAP to fake HSBC: scams packaged with licenses
As soon as the license was issued, the story was quickly crafted. In the market, token projects flaunting codenames like "HKDAP" and "HSBC" emerged, suggesting in their promotional language that these abbreviations symbolized "relationships with licensed issuers" and "support from major banks." For investors unfamiliar with regulatory details, seeing familiar bank abbreviations alongside "license" and "compliance" can easily lead to the mental image of a non-existent cooperative chain.
The Hong Kong Monetary Authority pointed out in the announcement that these tokens using "HKDAP" or "HSBC" as codenames, claiming to be related to licensed issuers, have no connection with the licensed issuers and are not issued by them, thus suspected of fraud or impersonating licensed issuers. In other words, those packaging themselves as "Anchorpoint related products" or "HSBC related products" rely not on regulatory endorsement but rather on the misappropriation and misuse of regulatory discourse.
The packaging techniques of the scams are not sophisticated, yet they hit the mark accurately. Project parties often only need to add a few sentences in the introduction—"linked to licensed products," "tied to future compliant products," "bank participation," "supported by regulatory frameworks"—and pair it with a codename highly similar to those of licensed institutions, enough to make some people lower their guard, equating keywords like "licensed" and "bank participation" to "all related tokens are safe and reliable." What often gets bought is just a code riding on the hype, rather than any vetted product.
This time, the regulators and the genuine licensed institutions chose to directly dismantle such narratives. The Hong Kong Monetary Authority explicitly emphasized: these tokens have no association with the licensed issuers. Almost simultaneously, Anchorpoint Financial Limited and The Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation Limited also reiterated through statements or press releases that as of now, they have not issued any regulated related token products in the market. Research briefs have even directly pointed out that given that neither licensed institution has issued any regulated products, all tokens in the market claiming to be associated with their regulated tokens can be classified as counterfeit or at least suspected of fraud.
The regulatory body then reminded the public to raise their awareness and be alert to the statements and press releases issued by Anchorpoint and HSBC regarding this situation, distinguishing authentic information through regulated or official channels. For those projects claiming to be "licensed related" or "bank cooperative" relying on "HKDAP" or "HSBC," this means an unflattering characterization: they are not "pioneers on the brink of compliance," but more likely just scams built on the new license and exploiting brand trust.
Two licensed institutions have yet to issue tokens, while market noise grows louder
Just as various "HKDAP" and "HSBC related tokens" were flooding social media, the two institutions involved responded unusually calmly, even a bit disappointingly: as of the issuance of the announcement by the Hong Kong Monetary Authority, both Anchorpoint Financial Limited and The Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation Limited made it clear that they have not issued any regulated related tokens in the market, and the actual products are still in the preparation and design stages.
In other words, the license has just been obtained, with not a single line written on a white page, yet the "finished products" are already overwhelming everywhere. Various tokens claiming to "anchor certain assets," "benchmark licensed products," or "pre-emptively position for license benefits," along with their promotional screenshots, are circulating in retail investor groups and KOL channels, but none of them can be found in the official product lists of the two licensed issuers—including the announced names like "HKDAP," all not on the list.
The research brief dismantled this seemingly tedious detail into a judgment rule that is simple to the point of being blunt: since neither licensed institution has issued any regulated products, all tokens on the market claiming to be related to their "regulated tokens" should be regarded as counterfeit or at least suspected of fraud. There is no gray area, nor do "internal testing quotas" or "limited whitelist subscriptions" exist as pretty phrases.
In this wave of information release, the Hong Kong Monetary Authority and the two licensed issuers intentionally redirected the focus back to a simple common sense: where and how will real products appear and be publicly announced? The three parties unanimously reminded the public that any important information related to the tokens and products should be obtained through regulated or official channels, rather than pieced together from screenshots, second-hand reports, and anonymous group chats. Before regulated products are available, the fact that "licensed institutions have not issued tokens" itself is the first and most critical filtering condition to exclude all "related tokens" in the market.
Regulatory Body Leads but Struggles to Completely Block Counterfeit Projects
The regulatory framework can "circle" legitimate issuers but struggles to "block" counterfeit projects. A license means that every step taken by Anchorpoint and HSBC will be under regulatory scrutiny, but this does not prevent anyone from easily creating a token on the blockchain, slapping on the codenames "HKDAP" or "HSBC," writing a piece of "cooperation" or "endorsement" text, and starting to sell it in various groups. The regulators may have illuminated the official channels, but cannot technically shut down those addresses speaking for themselves in the shadows.
In this incident, what the Hong Kong Monetary Authority can do is to quickly light up the signal after problems are exposed. The nature of the announcement is itself a "fraud warning," reminding the public in the most direct way to stay alert: tokens appearing in the market that claim to be related to licensed issuers and use "HKDAP" or "HSBC" as codenames are not issued by the licensed issuers and have no affiliation. At the same time, the Monetary Authority clarifies the facts while passing the microphone back to the licensed institutions, allowing the public to refer to the statements and press releases issued by Anchorpoint and HSBC, using official positions to minimize the "imaginative space."
This approach is essentially a mechanism for post-event correction and information clarification: counterfeit projects "rush ahead" in the market, while regulators and licensed institutions attempt to chase the truth through announcements, statements, and press releases, trying to redirect misled attention back to regulated and official channels. Both the Monetary Authority and the two licensed issuers remind the same thing—the information regarding tokens and products should be obtained from compliant channels, rather than guessed from well-packaged white papers, screenshots, and second-hand rumors.
The problem is that the licensing framework has just been implemented, and the ecosystem is still in a "trial operation" stage. The asymmetry of information naturally favors those who dare to "speak first." For ordinary citizens, what they hear first often isn't regulatory details but rather marketing phrases pieced together like "first batch of licenses," "bank cooperation," "coming online soon." During this window period where genuine regulated products do not exist, any project bearing similar phrases has a chance to exploit this cognitive gap for a bit of "regulatory arbitrage"—latching onto the licensing narrative while avoiding the direct mention of "we are that licensed institution."
This creates space for edge marketing: without explicitly stating "official issuance," they hint at "related to the licensed framework"; borrowing codenames like "HKDAP" or "HSBC" to gain trust while deliberately making the details vague, leaving it to retail investors to "fill in the blanks." When the Monetary Authority and the two licensed institutions come out with a unified tone, explicitly announcing "up to now no regulated related token products have been issued," it often comes after funds and attention have already been diverted.
This is the contradictory reality in the new ecosystem: on one side is the increasingly sophisticated licensing system, attempting to manage a limited number of issuers under compliant identities; on the other side is an almost zero-threshold online environment, allowing an infinite number of counterfeit projects to repeatedly be reborn outside of regulatory oversight. The Hong Kong Monetary Authority's efforts via fraud warnings, direct clarifications, and guiding the public back to official information sources do indeed draw a clear line between "true" and "false," but before that line is seen, the market will always first experience a period defined by misunderstanding, speculation, and even deliberate packaging.
Investor Self-Protection Checklist in the New License Era
In the stage where the license framework has just been established and genuine licenses and fake stories are interwoven, what investors can do to protect themselves is actually quite specific.
Step one is to confirm "who the counterparties are" from the regulatory end. Any token flaunting the tags of "licensed issuer" or "bank issuance" must be cross-referenced with the list of licensed issuers published by the Monetary Authority: currently, there are only Anchorpoint Financial Limited and The Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation Limited. Next, cross-reference with the second layer—taking the official website, statements, or press releases of these two institutions as a standard to verify if they have really mentioned any tokens. The Monetary Authority and these two institutions have repeatedly emphasized that the public should obtain information through regulated or official channels; and as of now, both have stated publicly that they have not issued any regulated related token products in the market. Research briefs have already firmly concluded: under this premise, all tokens in the market claiming to be related to their "regulated tokens" are all counterfeit or suspected of fraud.
Step two is to critically review the sources of information rather than being led by the names. The codenames "HKDAP," "HSBC," etc., called out by the Monetary Authority play on a kind of intuitive association: as long as a token's name contains "HK" or "HSBC," it seems to inherit the halo of regulation and banks naturally. If investment decisions remain at this superficial recognition level, it essentially hands over attention to scammers to design. What really needs to be asked is: do these projects' mentioned "partners" or "licensed institutions" appear in the Monetary Authority's announcements or the official information of related institutions? If not, treat it as ordinary marketing language, not regulatory endorsement.
Step three is to re-examine all high-yield stories as suspect. Regardless of whether the promotion mentions "licensed," "bank cooperation," "internal pre-sale," "reservation distribution," as long as it is accompanied by promises like "guaranteed," "sure profit," or "doubling in a short time," it should be assumed that it stands on the side of risk, not on the regulatory side. Especially at this stage, the two clear and defined facts from regulation are: the only licensed issuers are Anchorpoint and HSBC, and neither has issued any regulated token products—therefore, all high-yield tokens using "licenses" as selling points should be treated as scams, until official information proves otherwise.
It can be anticipated that as the Monetary Authority continues to issue warnings and the licensed institutions consistently clarify, the market education will gradually deepen, and the space for fakes leveraging "license" and "bank" will slowly shrink. But until then, the rhythm of "once regulatory news is released, fraud projects follow" will continue to recur: as regulation takes a step forward, a batch of arbitrage and fraud projects under the flag of "compliance" will promptly emerge in the market. Investors in the new license era might have to get used to one thing first—every time they see a piece of promotion about a license, cooperation, or compliance, they instinctively check the official information from the Monetary Authority and related institutions, anchoring their decisions on that side during the race between true and false information.
Join our community, let's discuss together and get stronger together!
Official Telegram Community: https://t.me/aicoincn
AiCoin Chinese Twitter: https://x.com/AiCoinzh
OKX Benefits Group: https://aicoin.com/link/chat?cid=l61eM4owQ
Binance Benefits 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。
