ZachXBT Accuses LAB Insiders of Controlling 95% Supply Amid $6B Valuation and Massive Bitget Withdrawals

According to the investigator, insiders behind LAB likely control more than 95% of the token supply even as its fully diluted valuation approached $6 billion. Retail participants, he claims, have been left exposed while key wallets moved large volumes through centralized exchanges.

Massive Withdrawals Spark Concerns

Recent on-chain data shows roughly 100 million LAB tokens — valued at approximately $480 million and representing over 32% of circulating supply — were withdrawn from Bitget in a short period via multiple new wallets. ZachXBT and other observers, including Lookonchain, flagged the activity as highly unusual.

The withdrawals followed deposits of hundreds of millions of tokens to the exchange in prior weeks, coinciding with price increases. ZachXBT linked these patterns to alleged coordinated trading involving market makers, particularly on Chinese platforms.

Allegations of Insider Control and Opaque Practices

ZachXBT claims the LAB team, including founders Vova Sadkov and Mark (previously tied to the Eesee project),failed to provide clear token distribution details. Supply figures across tracking sites like CoinGecko and CoinMarketCap reportedly show inconsistencies.

Additional claims include unilateral extensions of lock-up periods for public sale participants from three to nine months, while offering preferential terms to select influencers and larger holders. Reports also mention private OTC deals and loan structures routed through entities like The Lab Management Ltd in the British Virgin Islands, with some arrangements promising high monthly yields.

The investigator noted that wallets associated with these activities showed movements aligned with buybacks and further exchange deposits, raising questions about actual circulating supply available to regular traders.

Bitget Executives Under Fire

ZachXBT directed strong criticism at Bitget, accusing stakeholder Shawn Liu of enabling questionable activity behind the scenes while CEO Gracy Chen serves as the public face. He described the exchange as part of a "cartel" that benefits from such token listings and trading volume.

Supporters of the exchange pushed back, with some labeling the comments as biased, but ZachXBT maintained he has raised similar issues with other platforms in the past. He called for greater public scrutiny of Bitget's practices regarding high-risk token listings.

Patterns Similar to Previous Cases

The LAB situation echoes earlier controversies ZachXBT highlighted, including the RAVE token collapse where insiders were alleged to hold 90-95% of supply before a sharp decline. He warned that highly concentrated ownership creates conditions for manipulation, including potential squeezes against short positions, but also significant downside risk for retail.

ZachXBT urged exchanges to review LAB-related trading and consider freezing suspicious funds. He emphasized that his statements are based on on-chain observations and public data rather than financial advice.

As of now, neither LAB nor Bitget has issued a detailed public response to the specific allegations. The case has renewed broader discussions about token launch transparency, the role of centralized exchanges in listing decisions, and the challenges of tracking true circulating supply in new projects.

ZachXBT continues to call for better due diligence from traders and greater accountability across the industry. The developments add to ongoing debates about market integrity in the crypto sector, particularly around high-profile token launches and exchange oversight.