Exclusive Interview with the LIBRA Behind-the-Scenes Team: Unveiling the Truth Behind the Argentine Presidential Coin Harvest

Original Title: 《 the LIBRA interview》

Original Author: Coffeezilla

Translation by: Azuma, Odaily Planet Daily

Editor’s Note: The farce surrounding Argentine President Javier Milei's endorsement of the token LIBRA continues to unfold. Related parties such as KIP Protocol, Kelsier Ventures, Meteora, and Jupiter have been gradually exposed, revealing a conspiracy of "institutional manipulation and precise harvesting" that the community is slowly unraveling.

This afternoon, overseas KOL Coffeezilla released a video interview with Hayden Davis, CEO of Kelsier Ventures, a core participant behind LIBRA. This marks the first detailed response from Hayden Davis since the incident. In this video interview, Hayden Davis discusses the story behind LIBRA's issuance, the flow of funds, and the complexity of internal operations from his perspective.

Below is a summary and translation by Odaily Planet Daily based on the original video content.

Part 1: Inescapable "Sniping"

Host (Coffeezilla):

Over the past 48 hours, I have been investigating the disaster that is LIBRA. The Argentine president publicly endorsed this token, but with the collapse of its price, countless investors have suffered losses, and over a hundred million dollars has "vanished." People want to know where this money has gone.

I have now contacted key figures in this incident, and I will conduct a one-hour "interview" with Hayden Davis, the CEO of Kelsier Ventures, who is primarily responsible for this token release… I actually don't want to call this an "interview." Previously, Hayden Davis posted a one-minute response video on X, but it didn't go well, so this time I am more in the role of a listener, hoping to give Hayden Davis a chance to explain the ins and outs of this matter.

• Odaily Note: The interview started very abruptly; Coffeezilla explained that Hayden Davis initially said some non-public content, which he had to cut out.

Hayden Davis:

When LIBRA launched on Meteora, we tried to avoid "sniping" behavior, but it didn't work… Several professional "snipers" bought large amounts of tokens very early on… One address even held tokens worth 57 million dollars but never sold them. I don't know why **. Even when LIBRA's market cap was in the billions, if these "snipers" chose to sell, it would still directly crash the market. At that point, you must make real-time decisions: do you withdraw some liquidity to stabilize the price (because there are more marketing plans ahead)? Or do you let the price crash?

This happens with every token launch; about 3 to 10 guys will grab a large amount of chips. They are not benevolent holders; they just want to sell for profit. You can't track the addresses or find out who they are. LIBRA is no different.

Part 2: The President Responds Personally?

Hayden Davis:

Milei and his team told me that there would be a very important interview tomorrow, which would be broadcast live on television. He should clarify the doubts about me and the Libra project itself, as he is clearly also under scrutiny.

In the original LIBRA launch plan, Milei would release another video, and then some other high-profile individuals would interact with him. So at that time, our idea was whether we could drive away the "snipers" by withdrawing liquidity while retaining funds to prevent the project from completely collapsing after the price drop, and then let Milei release a second video and reinvest the funds, replicating a "Trump-like explosion feast."

I don't know why Milei deleted the first post; I suspect he faced immense political pressure, which caused him to panic. Given his position, I completely understand how he feels.

Part 3: I Still Hold 100 Million Dollars, But I Don't Know What to Do

Hayden Davis:

We have been trying to think about what to do next. People say this is another rug pull, which is not an objective fact; there are still tens of millions of dollars in locked liquidity, and the token's market cap is still 300 million dollars. This is not a rug pull; it just failed to plan.

As the custodian, I still control an account with 100 million dollars, but I really wish someone would tell me what to do with it. I don't want to be the target of public outrage; I haven't benefited from this, but my life is in danger because of it.

Host (Coffeezilla):

I want to add a few words. Regarding this 100 million dollars, I think the public's perception is that the term rug has been widely adopted, and its common meaning is "unfair value extraction." In this case, "unfair value extraction" refers to taking away funds because people believe you haven't clearly stated what this money will be used for, so they feel you are just extracting profits; that is their view.

Clearly, we need to do something with this 100 million dollars and try to return it to the people. I think this will be a very complex and difficult process because it is hard to achieve this goal without being further exploited.

Part 4: About Meme "Investment" or "Speculation"

Hayden Davis:

By the way, this is actually a multifaceted issue because this is a meme coin. If you put all your funds into a meme coin, that is clearly very foolish. Moreover, how do you assess the value of a token that has not yet died? Milei is likely to support LIBRA, so it may still have some potential for recovery.

Host (Coffeezilla):

I want to ask, will Milei profit from this?

Hayden Davis:

No.

Part 5: This Was Just an Experiment

Hayden Davis:

This plan was originally an experiment. Milei has a strong desire to put everything on-chain and make everything public, such as all financial transactions of the country. So I had many discussions with various people and foundations about how to build this system in the coming years, and we used this experiment to see how it would work.

Again, while Milei supported this token, it is not his official meme token, and this needs to be clarified.

Part 6: About Insider Information

Host (Coffeezilla):

Some people accuse insiders of knowing relevant information before the contract was made public. For example, Dave Portnoy, the founder of Barstool Sports, said he knew about this two weeks before the token launch but did not buy in advance; he bought in 10 minutes after Milei's post on X and ultimately lost about 5 million dollars, but you compensated him for this loss.

This further deepens ordinary users' suspicions about market manipulation; they must be thinking, "Look! Even if they lose money, they will be compensated."

Hayden Davis:

First of all, regarding Dave Portnoy, I was arguing with him that day. The compensation was entirely because I didn't want him to lose money. I will continue to talk to him, and I believe we will reach some different conclusions.

As for insider information, I can't guarantee that I, Manuel, or Mauricio have not told anyone else, but I can tell you that very few people are in the know. To me, the concept of insiders is always nonsense because in every meme token I know of, invested in, or participated in, the ones who benefit the most are the insiders, just like in any other business in the world; those closest to the action usually make the most money or lose the most.

Part 7: Market or Casino

Host (Coffeezilla):

I think people's frustration lies in the fact that they are not angry because you are good at trading, but because you know information that the public does not and have traded on that information. In the public market, this is illegal and constitutes insider trading… (interrupted)

Hayden Davis:

…but in the meme market, this is not illegal; this is what happens in every trade. This is the rule here; people know this, agree to it, and make money off it. If you want to blame this, you must blame everything else.

To be honest, I actually don't oppose this. But I think the vast majority of people betting on meme tokens, especially retail traders who acted in the early stages, this is the game of this market.

This is not a capital market; this is a casino.

Part 8: Sniping Yourself

Host (Coffeezilla):

Dave mentioned a situation where you allegedly refunded him with personal funds, but the refund address was traced back to an Avalanche address, which was also one of LIBRA's snipers. If you launch a token and then snipe your own token, isn't that unfair?

Hayden Davis:

I would say "no" (Coffeezilla is shocked). From the perspective of sniping, many times we snipe to prevent other snipers from entering… By the way, I am not a developer; I don't even know how to snipe. If you put me in front of a computer and asked me to figure out how to snipe, I wouldn't even know how to operate; I have never done bots, and I don't know those skills.

Host (Coffeezilla):

But you sniped Libra; your words are from the project's perspective, but Dave says that was your personal funds.

Hayden Davis:

This was just a mistake under pressure. I mean, if there was a mistake, it was because… in that particular situation, all I did was use that money… When it returned to the market, it would flow back through another wallet… That sniping money is project money; that's how we operate.

• Odaily Note: Hayden Davis's response here is clearly somewhat incoherent, and Coffeezilla looks speechless.

My point is, when you snipe as a team—I'm not saying it should always happen—many times it is to protect the project. If there is enough trading volume, we will withdraw some liquidity so that people have a chance to push the price up because meme token prices fluctuate too quickly. These projects can be crushed within two days; the only hope is that you have enough funds to fight against the snipers. This is a rule everyone knows on Solana; everyone knows how these token launches work…

Part 10: Continuing to Shift Blame to "Snipers"

Host (Coffeezilla):

Do you think the public knows that when a project launches, the project party will snipe its own project?

Even if we explain this from the most benevolent angle, assuming all this funding is not for profit but for the project itself, the public does not know that these secret activities are essentially problematic. The project party controls the price of the project, which is a strange form of price manipulation. This also makes the so-called concept of "the team having a treasury" meaningless because it seems you also have a treasury for sniping. The public has no transparency about these matters at all.

Hayden Davis:

I think this happens with all meme tokens unless they are completely dead and then taken over by the CTO. I am just sharing based on transparency considerations; maybe I overshared, but I don't care. When you are in charge, you need to figure out how to keep these projects going, and that is what we have been trying to do.

To add, if you want to know Dave's story, simply put, it was Milei's team that wanted Dave to get involved for some cross-promotion, and even eventually do an interview like Dave did with Trump, creating some possible opportunities.

The main reason this thing got messed up was massive sniping. There is no solution because these guys left easily with 80 million, 100 million, or even 200 million dollars, while others were harvested, and the project party is being blamed.

Part 11: Role Reversal

Host (Coffeezilla):

Anyway, I still think sniping your own project is crazy, but I agree that sniping is a huge problem faced by all meme tokens. I think insider information is also a huge issue, and these two problems can coexist because some sniping behavior is caused by insider leaks.

For example, in some cases, alpha groups not only look for information on-chain but also look for leaks of early contracts; they will spend money to obtain these early contract addresses to snipe tokens… (interrupted)

Hayden Davis (turning the tables):

…So what is the solution? I want to ask you, from the perspective of protecting the token, what can you do?

Coffeezilla (interviewee):

From a philosophical standpoint, I think meme tokens are a zero-sum game; they extract value from most participants. They disproportionately benefit insiders through trading structures and operations. Because for someone to earn a dollar, someone else must lose a dollar, so I feel the entire concept of meme tokens has been misguided from the start. Of course, I mainly focus on the unfair elements such as fraud or insider trading that exist within it.

If people want to participate in meme tokens, that is their freedom. But I think, at the very least, the market should be fair. I think meme coins themselves are foolish, but even if you want to participate in this foolishness, it should be done in a fair environment. It's like a casino; casinos not only have unfair gambling elements but also a lot of fraud, so they are strictly regulated. Casinos are regulated for a reason because people are deceived there. I think a similar situation should eventually happen in the meme token market, although clearly, some people strongly advocate for complete deregulation.

Part 12: Did You Participate in MELANIA?

Host (Coffeezilla):

I know the next topic is a bit sensitive, but I have to ask because it relates to my story. Many people associate you with the launch of MELANIA; did you participate in the issuance of MELANIA? Was it also sniped?

Hayden Davis:

Well… I told you before that I am happy to tell the truth, but the questions you are asking might put me in great danger. However, I am willing to answer.

I did participate; I believe the team did want to snipe it because the scale of TRUMP's sniping was too large, but we were not the main snipers, and we deliberately avoided that situation. We did not earn any profits from the MELANIA team, nor did we provide any liquidity.

Part 13: About Other Tokens

Host (Coffeezilla):

Are these the main two projects you participated in? I've heard of a few others, like HOOD; is that also yours?

Hayden Davis:

No.

Part 14: Do You Have to Kneel to Make Money? Who Has the Answer?

Hayden Davis:

Before we talk about other topics, I need to say a few things.

I once thought meme tokens might be part of the development direction of social finance. But now it seems I might be wrong; now people want to take me down just because I participated in this project.

The only ones who can "always earn" in this market are trading platforms. Whether the project succeeds or runs away, collapses, they make a fortune. I completely oppose this; it’s really too ** messed up. Whether it’s Meteora or Jupiter, they don’t care about the project's life or death; they just make money from trading fees. And what about those investors? They lose everything, but these platforms still make money. This is really messed up.

I have told many owners of trading platforms about this face to face. This is messed up; they should have some sense of responsibility. If a project really runs away, or someone is scamming investors, there should be a refund mechanism or some compensation. But anyway, the current question is—what should everyone do? When a system has problems and you want to fix it, you can only try to launch it differently, like starting from a higher market cap, deciding who to cooperate with and who not to, how to maintain control of the contract, how to promote without violating rules… What would you do?

I just hope that if this conversation is recorded and made public, people should at least stop and think about this issue. Because even the top people in this industry don't have answers. No one knows what to do.

I have also been thinking about what to do? How can I make money cleanly? Is that even possible?

Host (Coffeezilla):

I feel that no one in the entire crypto industry can give a good answer because the real answer is something people don't want to hear—that what you are doing is basically how to reasonably make a fortune by selling "tulips." You can certainly package it differently, but essentially, anything that is purely value extraction for the whole world is probably not a good thing. And this is the reality that many people in the crypto industry do not want to face.

Part 15: The Great Value Debate

Hayden Davis:

Whether it's VC coins or meme tokens, all crypto projects are essentially extracting value.

Host (Coffeezilla):

Wait a minute, I think there is a difference here—some things do bring some value, although the term "utility" has been misused, but at least it means a tool, something that can actually do something. And what about some things? They have no intrinsic value at all.

Hayden Davis:

But this is still value extraction, regardless of whether it has utility.

Host (Coffeezilla):

Not necessarily… not necessarily like that. For example, let's take Coca-Cola. You could say Coca-Cola makes money for its shareholders, right? But at least they provide a product—of course, you can argue about its health issues, but at least it is a product that people are willing to spend money on; it provides some service. In addition, it also pays dividends to shareholders. So even if a shareholder buys a stock for a dollar and sells it for a dollar, they still earn dividends. This means that Coca-Cola's business model is not a zero-sum game. Apple is also not playing a zero-sum game; these companies in the capital market are not zero-sum games. They create value, and that is their value foundation.

The initial idea of the crypto industry is: although it was a bit speculative at first, we should care about it because it has real financial technology behind it, providing a new value model. This was the core selling point of the entire crypto industry from the beginning… (interrupted)

Hayden Davis:

All crypto assets are actually similar. Take Bitcoin, for example; its value is entirely because a bunch of people say it has value, plus the so-called "decentralization"—that is, there is no known centralized controller. But essentially, it is still a value extraction game, or a zero-sum game. So whether it's a meme token or a large project claiming to have utility, they are essentially the same; to put it bluntly, they are all crap.

The only reason we are here is to hope that one day it is no longer crap, but to achieve this requires significant progress. We are just not there yet.

Host (Coffeezilla):

The problem is, this progress will not be born from meme coins… Alright, you continue.

Hayden Davis:

I just want to finish my point; I'm not saying I'm definitely right; I'm just saying this is my thought.

I don't feel like I'm definitely right, but my thought is that if certain meme tokens—because to be honest, over the past few months, everyone has only cared about meme coins, whether it was three or four months ago or since TRUMP launched—this has been the focus of everyone—if these meme coins can eventually create some utility, or if those big shots, like Dave, start cross-platform cooperation, mutual promotion, buybacks, and increase utility… then maybe these things will really develop into some kind of social finance model.

But before that, there will definitely be a lot of foolishness, which is also my current situation—a huge, messy problem, which is the 100 million dollar issue… we can return to that topic now.

Part 16: How to Handle 100 Million Dollars?

Host (Coffeezilla):

Okay, we can return to that topic. You have 100 million dollars in funds, and now you are considering how to handle it.

Previously, when we were chatting, I discussed that I don't know if my suggestion is the best, but my idea is: first, you need to take a snapshot, calculate the profit and loss (PnL), then determine who lost money and distribute compensation according to the losses. You can set a cap on compensation, limiting a person to apply for a maximum of 50,000 dollars in compensation. Assuming someone loses more than this amount, they are likely to be a more professional trader, while ordinary retail investors may lose less. This way, when compensating, you can prioritize those less professional investors (like an ordinary Argentine who saw the president's post).

You can use this method to help many people recover as much as possible, but the problem is that this plan requires a lot of time and may also need a dedicated data analysis team. I have told you before that this will be very time-consuming and labor-intensive, but given the current situation, this may be the most reasonable plan.

Hayden Davis:

I currently have about four different proposals I can share with you.

First of all, I am not talking to you to seek sympathy; I genuinely don't know what to do, and I need a trustworthy person to help. I don't want to be wronged because I never intended for things to end up like this.

And you have to understand, this involves the Argentine government! It's Milei! This is not an ordinary project… I am not part of this team! I am not! I am not! I am not! ------ I can say this 100 times.

I never wanted to be in this situation. I made the video just to ask for help, but so far, no one in the crypto circle has stepped up to help except Yat Su; this is ridiculous; these people are all crap!

Now there are four proposals; listen to this:

• No refunds, directly donate the money to charities in Argentina, and tell everyone to get lost. But in my view, this plan is terrible.

• Refund, but refunds need to be based on various different calculation standards, and no matter how it is done, there will still be people dissatisfied, and there will still be people coming to trouble me. Many people advise me not to do this because meme coins are inherently speculative, and no one should put all their savings into it. But even so, I personally feel that to some extent, refunds should still be made, even if it's just a partial refund calculated at a certain price. But this plan is still hard to implement.

• Put all the money back into the market and buy it back directly. We still have about 100 million dollars, plus about 11 million dollars in tokens and 13 million dollars in fees, so in total, we have about 110 million dollars in cash. If we put all this money into the market, the market cap could return to 2.5 to 3 billion dollars, which is LIBRA's historical peak.

  This way, at least the project still has some hope, and I can completely withdraw. You can say whatever you want; the money has returned to the market, and when the time comes, it doesn't matter if everyone criticizes me. But I want to make it clear— I will not touch this token again! I just want to quickly get rid of this mess; it has turned into a huge nightmare.

…The fourth proposal has not been mentioned yet, interrupted by the host.

Host (Coffeezilla):

Let me analyze this for you; I think this is definitely a completely wrong decision, and the consequences will be worse than you imagine.

First of all, this is not a fair solution. In contrast, prorated compensation at least tries to be fair, but reinjecting funds essentially only allows those snipers and bots to profit again. This project has already been taken advantage of by arbitrageurs from the start; those who placed orders the fastest, various bots, seized the opportunity to launch. Now, your plan is to do it again? To inject funds back into the market and give these arbitrageurs another chance to make big money?

Hayden Davis:

Why do you think this will be a disaster? If I announced this plan in advance, everyone would have the opportunity to buy in, so this wouldn't be insider trading! This would actually be completely free market behavior! Everyone would know that there is money flowing back into the market, so everyone can trade fairly, right?

Host (Coffeezilla):

But the problem is that those smarter people in the market will always take the lead! The moment you decide to buy back, those more experienced, more professional speculators will use this to arbitrage. Their funds, algorithms, and trading speed are something ordinary people cannot compete with! So this plan will ultimately only allow those with the most resources to earn more money while retail investors lose again.

Hayden Davis:

But isn't this the same problem? Whether it's the initial launch or the current fund reinjection, there is essentially no difference! The result is the same—no matter whether I choose to refund or inject funds, there will be people TMD dissatisfied!

Think about it; giving refunds is itself absurd—who would refund an investor in a meme token? It sounds ridiculous! But if I choose to inject funds into the market, there will still be a bunch of people coming to criticize me. No matter what I do, someone will be unhappy!

Part 17: Personal Safety and Negotiation Chips

Host (Coffeezilla):

But if you refund, why would people still be dissatisfied? Of course, they may not get all their money back, but at least they can get something back, which is better than losing everything, right?

Hayden Davis:

Because some people are not here to reason!

They directly message me, saying, "Give me 1.5 million dollars, or I will kill your whole family."

So, whether I refund or not, I have to face these people!

Host (Coffeezilla):

Are you keeping the money to protect yourself now?

Hayden Davis:

Of course not! But the problem is—now I not only have to protect myself but also my entire family!

Host (Coffeezilla):

The first thing you should do is quickly transfer the money out of your hands! You need to find a reputable institution, set up a legitimate foundation, and hand over this money so that you no longer have direct control over it. To be honest, one of the main reasons you are afraid is that you can still directly access this 100 million dollars.

Hayden Davis:

Yes, that's completely correct! But if I am to be completely honest, this money is also my bargaining chip with certain people and forces. It is precisely because I control this money that I have become a target for attacks, but it also protects me to some extent.

You have to understand, this is no ordinary scam, nor is it just a typical project failure. This is a completely out-of-control plan that involves national levels, even the president of Argentina.

Host (Coffeezilla):

I agree with your view; this is indeed an unusual failure of a plan.

Hayden Davis:

So if I hand over the money now, even to a trusted third-party custodian, I will lose my bargaining chip! And in the current situation, I simply cannot dare to do that.

Do you remember? I privately told you what I think might happen next. Until Milei and his team give me a clear answer, until I have a truly feasible plan, I will not act rashly!

This is also why I set myself a 48-hour window—I want to see if anyone can come up with a better plan than "let's drag this out for six months."

If the final conclusion is that the best plan is to hand over the money, no problem, I can do that without reservation! I absolutely do not want to touch this money again; I completely do not want to!

But in the current situation, my reputation is already ruined; that’s fine; but I have become a target for certain government forces, and this is a big deal, possibly involving more than one government.

And my only bargaining chip now is this money.

So this decision is far from as simple as "just hand it over." Things are not as you think!

Part 18: Taking the Blame for Milei?

Host (Coffeezilla):

I understand your point. You are right; this is not a simple story. This is also why I oppose you directly injecting money into the market because that does not solve your problem at all. What you are doing is essentially no different from just giving the money away!

I think you must advance with a plan, not impulsively. What you just said, "If we refund, people will still come to trouble me," is not entirely the same. If you ultimately find a trustworthy third-party custodian and transfer the money out, it will at least reduce your risk of being kidnapped or extorted. Because in that case, the money is not in your hands; even if someone wants to threaten you, you cannot give them money.

But I also understand your thinking—this 100 million dollars in your hands is, to some extent, your only bargaining chip for answers. Because Milei has been trying to distance himself from you. He initially admitted that you were part of the same group, but later he wanted to clear himself, but the fact is he was clearly involved in this project!

Hayden Davis:

Yes, and there is evidence to prove that I have at least met him several times!

Host (Coffeezilla):

Right, no one would deny that. I certainly wouldn't say Milei is completely unaware—he clearly knows about this project and has publicly supported it. It's just that now he may regret it, but that does not change the fact that he indeed supported it.

But this is a separate issue; the real key question is: how should this money be handled? I just want to remind you that you must seriously consider the issue of fairness. This project has been unfair from the start; no one can deny that. So when cleaning up the mess, you cannot choose a similarly unfair plan.

Indeed, the simplest approach is to directly inject the money back into the market and then walk away, letting those gamblers mess around by themselves. But a fairer, less criticized, and more responsible approach should be to account for the losses and find a way to return this money to the affected people. Moreover, the entire process must be slow because the amount involved is too large; it cannot be rushed.

But after all, I know I am not you, and I do not want to be you. When you first asked me for help, my first reaction was—"This sounds like a nightmare!"

I do not want to take over your 100 million dollar mess. But I do hope that those who lost money can get some of it back. So I can only offer my thoughts and tell you what I think is the fairest solution. The final decision still has to be made by you, and you must bear the consequences—this is your responsibility.

Hayden Davis:

Yes, but I must clarify—this mess falling on my shoulders is entirely because no one communicated with me! The current situation is too crazy! I am an ordinary person, but now I have to make decisions for the Argentine government, while they themselves are distancing from this project!

If they want to refund, then refund! Do you understand what I mean? This is fundamentally an unsolvable situation.

Host (Coffeezilla):

Did they give you any instructions? Did you ask them?

Hayden Davis:

No, zero response; no one is talking to me at all!

Host (Coffeezilla):

I think Milei is probably panicking now… He might be impeached; uh, at least they will initiate impeachment proceedings. I don't know if he will really be impeached in the end.

Hayden Davis:

He is clearly panicking. But he is unlikely to be actually impeached, but he will definitely be pushed into a very dangerous situation. To be honest, I am a staunch supporter of Milei; I believe he is innocent and absolutely not corrupt. Too many people in Argentina want to bring him down because they want the corrupt system to return; they have played this system to the fullest. But anyway, my current situation is fundamentally unsolvable! I have completely become a living target.

This matter brings me no benefit; my reputation is ruined, and the whole internet is talking about me; I have no idea what to do.

Part 19: Who is the Real Team?

Hayden Davis:

The most ridiculous thing is that I am just a "middleman"! I am not even the deployer, let alone the team!

Host (Coffeezilla):

Who specifically do you mean by the team?

Hayden Davis:

Kip is the team; they are the ones responsible for managing this project.

Host (Coffeezilla):

Oh right. But you were responsible for the deployment of the token, and the management of the flow of funds should be handled by Kip, right?

Hayden Davis:

Yes. My role is actually "project launch strategist"—I just make decisions based on the team's needs.

I am just executing what they want to do. I am not the kind of "operator" who sits behind the scenes calculating how much I can earn; that is not my position at all. My goal has always been to make these projects interact, grow stronger, and ultimately form real utility. That is why I started doing these things in the first place.

I am just an executor and have no say in many matters.

Part 20: Did You Profit from This?

Host (Coffeezilla):

But we have to admit that in most cases, you had the opportunity to make millions of dollars, right? We can't… (interrupted)

Hayden Davis:

Yes, yes, yes, I certainly am not doing this for free; I will not deny that.

Host (Coffeezilla):

I just want to confirm that you should not portray yourself as a victim. I think your current situation is indeed very bad, but financially…

Hayden Davis:

No, I am absolutely a victim in this matter! I am not making a dime from this; I will not see a single cent! But of course, I do not deny that I do not work for free.

Host (Coffeezilla):

How do we determine this? To be honest, I might understand how to check on-chain data better than 99% of people, but the on-chain data is too vast and complex, and it is impossible to figure it out completely.

I mean, when the flow of money is so large, and you can directly access these funds, and you have a bunch of other addresses, saying it is to "protect the project"… how can we ensure that this money will not end up in your pocket?

Hayden Davis:

Hmm… I think this question could be discussed in other projects, but in this case, the situation is completely different. Because now it is not just about money; my family is being targeted, and even the president is involved; the nature of the matter has completely changed.

To be honest, I have no interest in making money from this; this matter could even cost me my life or harm my family. This is not an ordinary financial scam; it does not involve ordinary investors but the Argentine mafia, forces outside the United States… even people within the United States are threatening me.

I do not want to touch this money at all; I do not want to profit from this matter. Believe it or not, but I am telling the truth.

Part 21: Is TRUMP Also Involved?

Host (Coffeezilla):

In some ways, I find you quite an interesting person. Although you know my position, I do not like meme tokens, and I do not want to keep criticizing you; I am very disgusted by this "sniping" method and do not agree with many of these operations.

You are an interesting presence because you are on the "behind-the-scenes side"—you have witnessed how some of the biggest projects in this industry operate. What should ordinary people know about LIBRA and MELANIA? You said people should think about these things… so how should they think?

From your perspective, what is happening behind the scenes in this industry? How much can the teams of these projects earn? What constitutes real insider information? If you sincerely believe people need to understand these things, how would you tell them?

Hayden Davis:

Hmm… I think the best example that illustrates the issue is the TRUMP project. Because I know that project raised the most money and made the most money for people. Take that one, to be honest, I think this is the best example. You know, right? Some people could buy in when the market cap was below 500 million.

Host (Coffeezilla):

Right, you mean those people also "sniped" this coin, right?

Hayden Davis:

No, no, no, not that kind of sniping.

I mean, before the official launch, at a private dinner, some people were given special access to buy in early.

Host (Coffeezilla):

What?!

Hayden Davis:

Yes, yes, yes, that's how it is.

Host (Coffeezilla):

Wait, wait, wait, what did you say?!

Hayden Davis:

Yes, that's how it is.

Host (Coffeezilla):

Who… who gave them the access? Who allowed it?

Hayden Davis:

I heard this—at a cryptocurrency event in Washington, D.C., some people were given this opportunity.

I don't know if it's true; I just heard about it.

Part 22: People Still Ask Me "When Will You Do the Next One"…

Host (Coffeezilla):

So what you mean is… what is your point?

Hayden Davis:

My point is that whether it's TRUMP or any large project of this scale, this is a game for a small circle. This is an unregulated casino.

If you are a retail trader hoping to make a few million from meme tokens, you better wake up.

So for retail investors, my advice is—unless you have 100,000 dollars, take 10,000 dollars to play with; otherwise, don't touch it.

This is not a good idea. It's no different from going to a casino.

Host (Coffeezilla):

So what is your play?

Hayden Davis:

My play is that I originally thought these meme tokens could turn into something with real utility, forming large-scale cross-project cooperation, creating real utility, and building cool ecosystems and collaborations that would allow people to truly socialize on a financial level.

But now, it is clear that I do not want to do this anymore.

I don't even know how to continue. However, I have indeed become quite a powerful "launch strategist." Even to this day, despite the many people cursing me, over twenty people still come to ask, "Hey, when will you do the next one?"

This is so TM crazy!

But this is a game, an unregulated game.

Do you know what David Sacks said?

Host (Coffeezilla):

You continue; what did David Sacks say?

Hayden Davis:

David Sacks said that meme tokens are "collectibles."

You see, our great president issued a meme token just two days before taking office. That team—I don't know if Trump himself benefited from it—but the team definitely made a fortune.

Part 23: Is Meme a Mistake?

Host (Coffeezilla):

So do you think this is a mistake? Just like you said, most people shouldn't touch these things; do you think completely deregulating this market would be a mistake?

Hayden Davis:

Yes, I mean… listen, my view now is completely different from three days ago.

I used to be a super supporter of pulling everything out of the regulated market. But now, I am starting to realize… this is also just a game for a small circle, no different from the dirty capital market, just with different gameplay. Every market that can make big money is essentially like this.

In any case, those with the most funds, the most resources, and the most control—those are the insiders in any market—they always win; they never lose. This is a universal rule in all markets.

Host (Coffeezilla):

I won't argue with that.

Hayden Davis:

Back to meme coins, how would I introduce this market to others? Meme coins are an unregulated market; they are highly volatile, manipulated by insiders, arbitrage trading is rampant, and all sorts of crazy things happen.

The ones who really care about these things are actually the top-tier people. Some people I know—for certain reasons, I won't name names—they are genuinely trying to figure this out; they are not bad people. Most of them are trying to find ways to see how to make this sustainable. But so far, no one has really found the answer; not a single one.

I believe that super disasters like LIBRA will eventually push the industry toward structuring, but you know what? Those big shots have never called me. Once things go wrong, they all disappear.

This is why I now feel, "TMD, I don't want to deal with this anymore."

Because I am losing something; I have a family, my life, my reputation, and a whole bunch of things. So I thought about it; I might as well go for it.

Someone once told me not to accept your interview, saying you would screw me over… but I thought, "Brother, he is a Christian and seems like a reasonable person, so let's talk and see what happens."

I only have two choices: either stand up and face the consequences or stay silent and be labeled a fraud for the rest of my life, but that is not the truth.

Host (Coffeezilla):

I agree. Regardless, you are willing to stand up and clarify things, which is better than everyone guessing your story.

I won't lie to you; I neither want to help anyone whitewash nor intentionally blacken anyone; I just want to tell the truth. So this interview, I will air it in full; except for the parts you told me not to release, everything else will be made public.

I won't edit it; I won't present it selectively; I will just put out everything you said and let everyone judge your position for themselves.

To be honest, you have been much more transparent in this situation than many others. Many people are afraid, so they disappear; even Milei is afraid of damaging his reputation.

I do think it is a good thing that you can stand up and clarify and answer these questions.

Of course, I do not think this project was done right, but I still want to thank you for being willing to talk about these things today.

Part 24: Final Summary

Hayden Davis:

I don't know if this counts as a closing statement, but I have a few things I want to clarify.

First of all, I want to emphasize again, not just because I really believe this, but because it really needs to be said—Milei knows nothing about cryptocurrency; he completely does not understand it.

I think he is smart; he may have a little understanding of blockchain, but I do not think he realizes what he is actually doing. So I want to clarify this point. But I still support him 100% because I believe he is the only hope in one of the most corrupt countries in the world, and this country finally has a chance to break free from corruption.

Secondly, I actually did not plan to go into such detail at first, but I think this matter is very important. In this matter, your content directly affects my family and has made my situation extremely dangerous. But the problem is, I am not the leader of this matter; I also do not want to be the leader, so I am not playing the victim; I do not need to be seen as a victim, but I hope people can at least have a little empathy because moving forward, I may need security for a long time, and my life has basically been completely messed up.

All of this is because of something I never wanted to get involved in. I want to emphasize again that I did not take a single penny from this project; I participated because I was Milei's advisor, and I wanted to use this opportunity to promote other dialogues, advance blockchain technology, and facilitate more industry cooperation; I did not care whether I could make money from this.

Other projects? Fine, I admit I have made money on other projects, but not this time. Finally, no matter how you plan to release this interview and how you edit it, I just hope at least people can see one thing—I am not a fraud.

And I also do not think LIBRA is dead; more importantly, I believe Milei will support it. Of course, this answer may be revealed in the next day or two; my judgment is that he will stand by LIBRA; in his current situation, supporting LIBRA is far more beneficial to him than not supporting it.

Host (Coffeezilla):

I think you have said quite a bit; thank you for being willing to stand up and share your perspective.

As I said, I may not agree with your views, but you have indeed revealed some key issues that no one has mentioned before. These discussions are valuable, and this interview may ultimately become an important reference.

So, thank you.

Hayden Davis:

No problem, you’re welcome.

Host (Coffeezilla):

Alright, take care!