ZachXBT accuses LAB of pumping and dumping, offering a $10,000 bounty to track down the behind-the-scenes masterminds

On Thursday, on-chain sleuth ZachXBT publicly accused the founder of the artificial intelligence trading terminal project LAB, Vova Sadkov, of allegedly manipulating the market, offering a $10k bounty to gather related internal information. ZachXBT and on-chain analyst Specter claim that before the token price surged in early May, the LAB team coordinated to deposit LAB tokens worth tens of millions of dollars into exchanges, forming a suspected “pump-and-dump” scheme.

$10k Bounty: Key information ZachXBT is seeking

On the X platform, ZachXBT said that anyone who can provide the following information can apply for a $10k reward: Sadkov’s passport or ID documents, as well as internal information from the market makers used to trade the spot LAB project on Bitget, Bybit, Binance, or OKX, including contract and chat records, among others.

ZachXBT explained that he had previously privately messaged and contacted the LAB team but received no response, so he escalated the matter into a public investigation. He also urged centralized exchanges (CEXs) to set up proactive detection mechanisms: “When events like this happen, the central exchange should freeze the profits of the intermediaries and allocate them to users (victims). It should not rely solely on users filing reports.”

On-chain allegations: Token deposit paths and cross-links with SkyAI

On-chain analyst Specter pointed out that some suspicious token deposits had occurred weeks earlier, and the related gas fees came from wallets allegedly controlled by the LAB team or Sadkov. Specter also found that some of the involved wallets were simultaneously associated with SkyAI tokens—ZachXBT had previously also accused SkyAI of showing signs of market manipulation, suggesting the related funds may be interconnected across projects.

In the suspected manipulation pattern described by ZachXBT: manipulators concentrate large token deposits into exchanges before the token price jumps, coordinating price increases to attract retail traders to chase the move; then they dump and arbitrage at the peak. The entire process leverages retail traders’ psychology of chasing price increases.

Broader industry criticism: The suspected manipulation list keeps expanding

ZachXBT’s investigative action is not an isolated case. He has recently publicly called out multiple projects with “highly suspicious price action”:

RAVE: Released a detailed investigation report last month, pointing out suspected manipulation behind a 95% drop in the token price

SIREN, MYX, COAI, M, PIPPIN, RIVER: Marked as “highly suspicious price action,” added to the suspected list

In April, ZachXBT said: “Exchanges need to intervene faster to打擊 manipulation. Large-scale detection isn’t easy, but every day of delay means retail traders incur losses, while platforms can still charge fees based on trading volume. No matter the intent, the result is the same.”

Common Questions

How does a “pump-and-dump” scam specifically operate on centralized exchanges?

A pump-and-dump scheme refers to manipulators first stockpiling tokens, then pushing up the token price by coordinating large buy orders, attracting retail traders to follow the trend, and finally dumping and arbitraging at the high point. In the version on centralized exchanges, manipulators may initially deposit a large amount of tokens into an exchange in advance, creating potential sell pressure or maintaining a fake sense of market depth directly through market-maker coordination, misleading retail traders about token demand.

Does ZachXBT’s bounty system have legal validity?

ZachXBT’s bounty is based on personal reputation and public commitments, not a formal legal contract framework. He has long tracked scam cases through public investigative reports, and has a certain level of credibility within the on-chain sleuth community. The bounty is typically paid out directly via crypto wallets. However, the anonymous protection of information providers and the information verification standards both rely on personal trust rather than legal mechanisms.

What responsibility do centralized exchanges take in such market manipulation allegations?

At present, the crypto market lacks unified market manipulation regulatory standards like those in traditional financial markets, so an exchange’s main responsibilities largely come from self-regulatory rules rather than mandatory legal obligations. ZachXBT’s position is that exchanges should not just wait for users to file reports; they should proactively establish large-scale detection mechanisms, and after confirming manipulation, freeze related profits allocated to victims, rather than continuing to collect trading fees from the volume generated by manipulation.