Gram Instead of Toncoin: Did Durov Bring Back the Banned Name with Trump's Tacit

[Alpen]

The TON blockchain has stopped pretending to be independent of Telegram. Pavel Durov personally announced that Toncoin would be renamed Gram.

This was the original name of the TON blockchain’s native cryptocurrency. Durov had to abandon the launch of the blockchain and return the $1.7 billion received from the Gram presale to investors. A U.S. court ruled that the token was a security following a lawsuit filed by the SEC.

By renaming Toncoin, Durov has essentially violated the settlement agreement with the U.S. regulator. This suggests that the Telegram founder is confident that the SEC won’t take legal action against him.I believe Trump's involvement here is hard to rule out . The US president’s family is heavily involved in the crypto business and, let's just say, is not averse to offering help.

For now, I think crypto investors agree with this point of view. Gram rose 15% following the announcement of the news. Conversely, speculators sold off Toncoin after 8 May, despite a four-day increase in value when Durov became the chief validator. At that time, prices soared by 60%.

[khatarnak]

I think the Trump connection is a bit of a stretch.

To me, this looks more like a branding move than anything else. A lot of people still remember the original Gram project, so bringing back the name naturally creates attention and excitement.

I'm also not sure the market is reacting to any real fundamental change. Sometimes a strong narrative is enough to move prices, at least in the short term.

The more interesting question is whether anything has actually changed besides the name.

[Alpen]

I think the Trump connection is a bit of a stretch.

To me, this looks more like a branding move than anything else. A lot of people still remember the original Gram project, so bringing back the name naturally creates attention and excitement.

I'm also not sure the market is reacting to any real fundamental change. Sometimes a strong narrative is enough to move prices, at least in the short term.

The more interesting question is whether anything has actually changed besides the name.

They remember, you say? It's been seven years, so it really depends on what exactly people choose to remember. Personally, I remember when internal communications were exposed in court, revealing discussions about token manipulation strategies and undisclosed emissions. I remember how investors were lured in with guaranteed price pumps driven by that very manipulation.

And by all appearances, nothing has changed. Unless there is a direct connection to Trump, this looks like a classic pump-and-dump scheme. After all, TON could easily face another regulatory investigation in the US