Nick Cannon launching new ‘legit’ memecoin after fans lose hundreds of thousands on failed ‘Wild ‘n Out’ token

New York Post - Apr 12th, 2025

Nick Cannon is planning to launch a new cryptocurrency token following the disappointing performance of his previously promoted WILDNOUT memecoin. The memecoin, named after Cannon's MTV show 'Wild N’ Out,' initially surged to a $10 million market cap but plummeted to around $67,000, resulting in significant losses for investors. Despite distancing himself from the failed memecoin, Cannon is moving forward with an enterprise token project, emphasizing the importance of compliance and community building. He assures his followers that the new venture will be managed correctly, aiming to provide legitimate value and utility.

The WILDNOUT debacle highlights the volatile nature of memecoins and the limited regulatory oversight in the cryptocurrency market. Critics have accused Cannon of failing to adequately support the initial coin, with some labeling him a 'grifter.' Meanwhile, crypto expert David Kennedy notes the pervasive lack of regulation, likening the situation to the 'Wild West.' As Cannon embarks on his new project, he vows to learn from past mistakes and ensure the protection of his supporters' interests, aiming to restore trust and credibility in his brand.

Cryptocurrency Regulation Nick Cannon Community Building Wildnout Memecoin Enterprise Token Investment Losses

Story submitted by Fairstory

RATING

6.2

Moderately Fair

Read with skepticism

The article provides a well-structured and engaging narrative about Nick Cannon's involvement in cryptocurrency, focusing on the failure of the WILDNOUT memecoin and his plans for a new token. It effectively captures reader interest by combining elements of celebrity intrigue and financial risk. However, the article's reliance on Cannon's statements and the lack of authoritative sources or expert analysis limit its accuracy and depth. While it raises important questions about the ethical implications of celebrity endorsements and the need for regulatory oversight, a more balanced presentation of perspectives and additional verification of claims would enhance its credibility and impact. Overall, the story is timely and relevant, but it could benefit from more comprehensive reporting to fully inform and engage its audience.

Accuracy

The story provides a detailed account of Nick Cannon's involvement with the WILDNOUT memecoin and his plans to launch a new cryptocurrency. It accurately reports the timeline of the WILDNOUT coin's market performance, including its initial rise and rapid decline in value. However, the article lacks specific evidence to verify Cannon's claims that he was not the originator of the coin and did not profit from it. The story also mentions an SEC decision regarding memecoins but does not provide direct evidence or a statement from the SEC to confirm this. Overall, while the narrative seems plausible, certain claims require further verification to ensure complete accuracy.

Balance

The article presents multiple perspectives, including Nick Cannon's defense of his actions and the criticisms from investors and commentators. However, it leans slightly towards Cannon's narrative by extensively quoting his statements and explanations. The viewpoints of the investors who suffered losses are mentioned but not explored in depth. Additionally, the article could benefit from more input from financial experts or regulatory bodies to provide a balanced view of the implications of Cannon's actions and the broader context of cryptocurrency investments.

Clarity

The article is well-structured and clearly presents the sequence of events surrounding the WILDNOUT coin and Cannon's future plans. The language is straightforward and accessible, making it easy for readers to follow the narrative. However, the article could benefit from a more detailed explanation of technical terms, such as 'enterprise token,' to ensure comprehension for readers unfamiliar with cryptocurrency terminology.

Source quality

The article relies heavily on Cannon's statements from a live forum and social media posts, which are primary sources but may not be entirely impartial. It lacks input from independent experts or official bodies, such as the SEC, to corroborate the claims made. The inclusion of critics' opinions adds some depth, but the absence of authoritative sources diminishes the overall reliability of the information presented.

Transparency

The article provides transparent details about Cannon's statements and actions, but it does not disclose the methodology used to verify claims, such as the number of investors affected or the exact financial losses incurred. There is also no mention of potential conflicts of interest or the basis for Cannon's new cryptocurrency venture. Greater transparency regarding the sources of information and any potential biases would enhance the credibility of the reporting.