Original Author: Sam Kessler, Coindesk

Original Title: Inside Movement’s Token-Dump Scandal: Secret Contracts, Shadow Advisors and Hidden Middlemen

Translation by: Scof, ChainCatcher

Event Highlights:

• Movement Labs is investigating whether it was misled into signing a market-making agreement without full knowledge. This agreement granted control over 66 million MOVE tokens to an unidentified intermediary, leading to a massive sell-off worth $38 million immediately after the token's launch.
• Internal contracts reveal that a company with almost no digital footprint, Rentech, appeared on both sides of the transaction: as a subsidiary of Web3Port on one hand, and as an agent for the Movement Foundation on the other, raising questions about potential self-dealing.
• Insiders at the Movement Foundation initially warned about the transaction, calling it "the worst deal they had ever seen"; experts noted that the agreement could structurally incentivize artificially inflating the token price before dumping it on retail investors.
• This incident exposed serious divisions among Movement's top leadership: executives, legal advisors, and project consultants pushed the deal despite internal opposition, and their actions are now under comprehensive review.

A financial agreement originally intended to boost the launch of the MOVE cryptocurrency ultimately devolved into a token dump scandal, resulting not only in Binance banning trading but also sparking intense internal disputes within the team.

Documents obtained by CoinDesk reveal the crux of this crisis and explain how the situation spiraled out of control.

According to internal documents reviewed by CoinDesk, the blockchain project Movement—the developer of the MOVE cryptocurrency—is investigating whether it was induced to sign a financial agreement without full knowledge. This agreement granted a single entity unusually concentrated control over the MOVE token market.

This agreement led to 66 million tokens being rapidly dumped into the market the day after the MOVE token was first listed on exchanges on December 9, causing a price crash and igniting strong suspicions of insider trading. Notably, the project received backing from World Liberty Financial, a crypto venture capital platform supported by Trump.

Cooper Scanlon, co-founder of Movement Labs, stated in a Slack message to employees on April 21 that the company is investigating why more than 5% of MOVE tokens originally reserved for market maker Web3Port were transferred through an intermediary named Rentech. He pointed out, "The foundation was led to believe that Rentech was a subsidiary of Web3Port, but that is clearly not the case." Rentech denies any false statements or misleading actions.

Cooper Scanlon's Slack message. Rentech is misspelled as "Rentek." (Obtained by CoinDesk)

According to an internal memorandum from the Movement Foundation, the contract signed with Rentech effectively lent about half of the publicly circulating MOVE tokens to a single counterparty. This gave that entity an unusually large degree of control over the still nascent token. Several experts told CoinDesk that this arrangement is highly unusual.

Even more concerning, a version of the contract obtained by CoinDesk shows it included an incentive mechanism to "induce manipulation of the token price to a fully diluted valuation exceeding $5 billion, then dump the tokens on retail investors and proportionally share the profits." Zaki Manian, a veteran crypto project founder, bluntly stated after reviewing the documents: "Even just participating in such a black-and-white contract is insane."

Market makers are typically hired to provide liquidity for newly issued tokens, usually trading with borrowed funds from the token issuer on exchanges to stabilize prices. However, this role can easily be abused, allowing insiders to quietly manipulate the market and cash out large amounts of tokens without immediately raising external alarms.

A series of contract documents obtained by CoinDesk reveal the gray areas in the crypto industry characterized by weak regulation and opaque legal structures—these loopholes often turn publicly-facing projects into tools for the benefit of a select few.

While rumors of market-making abuse are common in the crypto space, specific details are rarely made public.

The market-making contract reviewed by CoinDesk shows that Rentech appeared in the agreement with the Movement Foundation simultaneously as both an agent for the Movement Foundation and a subsidiary of Web3Port—this "dual identity" arrangement theoretically gave it the ability to dictate terms and profit from the deal.

Ultimately, the collaboration between Movement and Rentech resulted in wallets associated with the Chinese financial company Web3Port rapidly dumping $38 million worth of MOVE tokens the day after the token was listed on exchanges. Web3Port claims to have previously collaborated with projects such as MyShell, GoPlus Security, and Trump-backed World Liberty Financial.

Due to misconduct, the exchange Binance subsequently banned the market-making account, and Movement announced it would initiate a token buyback program.

Similar to stock option mechanisms in startups, crypto projects often have lock-up periods for tokens to prevent insiders from dumping large amounts during the early trading phase.

However, Binance's ban raised questions about Movement in the market—there is widespread speculation that the project may have reached some sort of early unlocking agreement with Web3Port, although Movement denies this claim.

Mutual Accusations

Movement is one of the most closely watched crypto projects in recent years, positioned as a next-generation Layer 2 blockchain aimed at enhancing Ethereum's scalability based on the Move programming language launched by Facebook.

The project was founded by two 22-year-old dropouts from Vanderbilt University, Rushi Manche and Cooper Scanlon, who successfully raised $38 million, entered the World Liberty Financial portfolio, and garnered widespread attention on social media.

According to a Reuters report in January this year, Movement Labs was nearing the completion of a $100 million funding round, potentially valuing the company at $3 billion.

CoinDesk interviewed more than a dozen insiders familiar with Movement's internal operations (most requested anonymity to avoid retaliation), and there were many conflicting accounts regarding who led the Rentech transaction—industry experts generally considered the arrangement highly unusual.

Galen Law-Kun, head of Rentech, denied that the foundation was misled during the signing process and insisted that Rentech's overall structure was built with the full assistance of Movement Foundation's general counsel YK Pek.

However, according to an internal email and other communication records reviewed by CoinDesk, Pek denied his involvement in the establishment of Rentech and initially strongly opposed the transaction.

Movement Labs co-founder Scanlon stated in a message to employees that Movement is "the victim in this incident."

According to four insiders, Movement is also investigating the potential responsibility of its co-founder Rushi Manche—he was the one who initially forwarded the Rentech transaction to the team and pushed for the proposal internally; additionally, informal advisor Sam Thapaliya, who is also Law-Kun's business partner, is under investigation.

Web3Port did not respond to multiple requests for comment.

“Possibly the Worst Deal I've Ever Seen”

Although Movement initially rejected the high-risk market-making agreement with Rentech, it ultimately signed a revised version with similar content, relying solely on a guarantee provided by an intermediary with no verifiable record.

In the extremely loosely regulated crypto industry, project teams typically separate their operational structures into a non-profit foundation and a for-profit development company. The developers (in this case, Movement Labs) are responsible for technical construction, while the foundation manages tokens and community resources.

The two should theoretically remain independent to avoid securities regulatory risks. However, according to internal communications reviewed by CoinDesk, Movement Labs employee Rushi Manche seems to have played a leading role in the non-profit Movement Foundation as well.

Rushi Manche, co-founder of Movement, forwarded the first Rentech contract to an employee in the Movement ecosystem. (Obtained by CoinDesk)

On March 28, 2025, Manche sent a draft of a market-making agreement to the foundation via Telegram, stating that it needed to be signed quickly.

On November 27, 2025: Rentech proposed a draft of a market-making agreement to Movement. In the agreement, Rentech was the borrower, and Movement was the lender. The agreement was ultimately not signed. To protect privacy, CoinDesk has redacted some personal names in the disclosed documents, and some names were pre-obscured in the original documents.

The draft proposed lending up to 5% of MOVE tokens to Rentech (a company with no digital footprint).

The foundation's legal advisor, Pek, pointed out in an email that the agreement "might be the worst deal I've ever seen." In another memorandum, he warned that this move would hand over control of the MOVE market to an unidentified external entity. Marc Piano, a director of the foundation in the British Virgin Islands, also refused to sign the agreement.

Movement Foundation's General Counsel YK Pek and Director Marc Piano respond to the Rentech agreement (obtained by CoinDesk)

One highly controversial clause in the contract allowed Rentech to immediately liquidate its held tokens when the MOVE token's "fully diluted valuation" exceeded $5 billion, sharing profits with the foundation on a 50:50 basis.

Manian pointed out that this design effectively incentivized market makers to artificially inflate the token price and then sell large amounts of tokens at a profit.

Although the Movement Foundation ultimately rejected this draft, negotiations with Rentech continued.

According to three individuals familiar with the negotiations and legal documents obtained by CoinDesk, Rentech subsequently claimed to be a subsidiary of the Chinese market maker Web3Port and offered to provide $60 million in collateral from its own funds, which somewhat impressed the foundation.

On December 8, 2024, the Movement Foundation finally signed a revised market-making agreement with Rentech, removing some of the most controversial clauses. This included the removal of a clause that would allow Web3Port to sue the foundation for compensation if it failed to list MOVE on specific exchanges.

On December 8, 2025, Rentech reached a revised market-making agreement with Movement. In the agreement, Rentech was still the borrower, but its identity was explicitly marked as "Web3Port" (the name has been obscured in the document), while the Movement Foundation was the lender. The agreement has been formally signed. CoinDesk has redacted some personal names in the documents for privacy reasons, and some names were pre-obscured in the original documents.

Despite the revised agreement being drafted by Pek, who had previously opposed the transaction, its core content remained highly similar to the original version: the agreement still allowed Web3Port to borrow 5% of the total MOVE tokens and sell them for profit under certain mechanisms, although the method of fund allocation was adjusted.

The borrower's name in the new contract is Web3Port, signed by a director of Rentech.

Notably, domain records show that on the day the agreement was signed, the email used by the director belonged to the newly registered domain web3portrentech.io.

Prior Agreements

According to three insiders, the relevant personnel at the Movement Foundation were not aware that Web3Port had signed another agreement with "Movement" weeks prior to the formal signing of the agreement on December 8.

On November 25, 2024, Rentech signed a market-making agreement with Web3Port (the name of Web3Port has been obscured in the document). In this agreement, Rentech was the lender, and Web3Port was the borrower, with Rentech also referred to as "Movement" in the document. CoinDesk obtained this contract, although some content has been redacted, and personal names have been further processed for privacy.

This version of the agreement shows that Web3Port had already reached an agreement with "Movement," with terms highly similar to the initial market-making proposal that the Movement Foundation had previously rejected. In this contract, Rentech was listed as a representative of Movement.

The contract between Web3Port and Rentech allows the borrower to liquidate assets at a 50% profit. (obtained by CoinDesk)

The structure of this agreement is similar to the contract dated November 27, which explicitly allowed market makers to liquidate when the MOVE token price reached specific targets—this was one of the core clauses in the old agreement and a key issue that industry experts like Zaki Manian were particularly wary of.

"Shadow Co-Founder"

Insiders revealed that there are various speculations within Movement regarding who the behind-the-scenes orchestrators of the relationship with Rentech are. This collaboration ultimately led to the token dump incident in December last year and plunged Movement into a public relations storm.

According to Blockworks, this agreement was initially circulated internally by Rushi Manche. Manche was briefly suspended last week for investigation.

In response to CoinDesk, Manche stated, "Throughout the market maker selection process, the MVMT Labs team trusted several advisors and members within the foundation team to provide opinions and assist in designing the transaction structure. Clearly, at least one member of the foundation represented both parties' interests in this transaction, which is something we are currently investigating in depth."

The incident has also raised questions about Sam Thapaliya's role. He is the founder of the crypto protocol Zebec and one of Manche and Scanlon's advisors.

Communications reviewed by CoinDesk show that Thapaliya was copied on emails sent by Web3Port to the "Movement team" and also appeared in other correspondence related to market-making arrangements alongside Rentech and Manche.

Web3Port copied Sam Thapaliya and Rushi Manche in an email sent to Rentech (email obtained by CoinDesk)

"One employee stated, 'As far as I know, Sam is a close advisor to Rushi and can be considered a 'shadow third co-founder' to some extent. Rushi has always kept this relationship low-key, and we usually only hear his name occasionally.'"

"We often find that after decisions have already been made internally, they are suddenly changed at the last minute," another employee said, "and whenever this happens, we know it's likely Sam's influence."

According to three attendees, Thapaliya appeared at Movement's office in San Francisco on the day the MOVE token was publicly launched.

Screenshots from Telegram reviewed by CoinDesk also show that Movement co-founder Scanlon had tasked Thapaliya with assisting in filtering the whitelist for the MOVE token airdrop—a strictly limited list of wallet addresses eligible to participate in the community giveaway (which had been postponed multiple times).

This arrangement further deepened some employees' impressions that Thapaliya's influence within Movement far exceeded what the company publicly disclosed.

Thapaliya told CoinDesk that he had known Rushi Manche and Cooper Scanlon since they were college students and later provided advice to Movement as an external consultant. He emphasized that he "does not have any shares in Movement Labs," "has not received any tokens from the Movement Foundation," and "does not have any decision-making power in either organization."

Who is Rentech?

Rentech is the core entity at the center of the token controversy, created by Galen Law-Kun, who is also Thapaliya's business partner. Law-Kun told CoinDesk that he established Rentech as a subsidiary of the Singapore-based financial services company Autonomy, aimed at connecting crypto projects with family offices in Asia.

In response to CoinDesk's statement, Galen Law-Kun stated that YK Pek "assisted in establishing and served as the General Counsel of Autonomy SG, which is the parent or affiliated company of Rentech." He also claimed that although Pek had opposed the initial agreement with Rentech internally, he "had suggested establishing Rentech's structure to advance the project launch" and "participated in drafting the first version of the contract, which was almost identical to the contract he later drafted and approved for the foundation."

However, CoinDesk's investigation has not found any evidence that Pek represented Autonomy in establishing Rentech or drafted the first version of the contract.

In response, Pek clarified, "I am not, nor have I ever been, the General Counsel for Galen or any of his entities." He further explained that a corporate administrative services company he co-founded had indeed provided company secretary services for over 150 entities in the Web3 space, including two companies under Law-Kun. However, both companies reported "no assets" in their 2025 annual reports, and neither is Rentech.

Pek stated that he "spent two hours" reviewing a consulting agreement signed by Law-Kun with a certain project in 2024; additionally, "he contacted me regarding FTX-related filing deadlines," and "in August, he forwarded a Docusign NDA, which I only glanced at and did not charge a fee for."

Pek concluded, "I completely do not understand why Galen claims I am his General Counsel; this statement confuses and disturbs me." He added that in the email correspondence between Law-Kun and his corporate secretary service partner, the other party was actually represented by a private lawyer named "Hillington Group."

According to YK Pek, "The Movement Foundation (of which I am a part) and the two General Counsels of Movement Labs were introduced to GS Legal through Rushi Manche and were referred to as the legal representatives of Rentech."

In Galen Law-Kun's account, Pek was introduced to him as Autonomy's legal counsel for ten projects and "never disputed or corrected this statement." Law-Kun also claimed that introducing GS Legal was merely a formality as per Movement's request.

Movement co-founder Scanlon stated in a Slack message to employees that the company has hired the external auditing firm Groom Lake to conduct a third-party independent investigation into the recent abnormal market-making activities.

He wrote in the message, "In this incident, Movement is the victim."

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。