pools.trade

$POOLS ON-CHAIN THESIS POOLS CREATOR 0xbe4eba417999c7269c6d631eaef82ad3f2bcdd9e │ ▼ UNISWAP EURC20 FACTORY 0x000000e200088D55C39a11F609E5F667729ad49b │ ▼ $POOLS 0x385b36Ff682Ab4C76E7c37A66b96aABC466471d5 Funding: 0x6512306283ce0236b703d39a8e697acb20fff828 │ ▼ $POOLS Look at how POOLS was created. POOLS CREATOR 0xbe4e...cdd9e ↓ calls createToken ↓ UNISWAP UERC20 FACTORY 0x0000...d49b ↓ uses CREATE2 ↓ $POOLS CONTRACT 0x385b...71d5 And separately: FUNDING / OPERATIONS 0x6512...f828 ↓ funding relationship ↓ POOLS deployment This is important because the 0x0000...d49b address isn't some random deployer, it's Uniswap's official UERC20Factory. Uniswap's factory records the caller as the token creator and uses CREATE2 to deterministically deploy the token. So the picture is: Creator → Uniswap infrastructure → POOLS with a separate wallet appearing in the funding/deployment trail. That doesn't prove that all three addresses belong to one team. But it does show that $POOLS wasn't simply deployed from a random contract in isolation. The real question is: WHO is behind `0xbe4e...cdd9e` and `0x6512...f828` and what other launches are connected to them? If those wallets repeatedly connect to the same launch infrastructure, other launches, liquidity strategies or funding sources, the POOLS thesis becomes MUCH bigger. 👀 https://x.com/masterm_______?s=11