Reviewing $TIMI's performance, it indeed confirms the initial prediction—with an entry cost of around 150,000, the phenomenon of reaping profits is obvious, and there were also significant price spikes in between.

Since the previous "Sunny" incident, it has become clear what the nature of such projects is—completely aimed at exploiting users, with no real vision. Do these kinds of tokens rely on buying at low prices to profit from the difference? Honestly, it's too difficult.

At that time, I noticed that the wear and tear cost far exceeded the token price itself, and this signal couldn't be clearer—if the situation is unfavorable, you must cut and run decisively. This judgment also saved me. A few brothers in the group also asked about entry points at that time, and I had estimated that to make it onto the leaderboard, a volume of about 150,000 was needed, and the final data basically matched.

The lesson is: focus on the project's fundamentals and liquidity depth, which is much wiser than blindly chasing high prices.