Reports suggest that $OM’s sharp rally earlier this year may have been driven by a fragile liquidity loop, rather than sustained organic demand.

According to market chatter, accounts linked to market makers allegedly used $OM as collateral to borrow USDT, then recycled that liquidity back into the market to continue buying $OM. The structure held as long as those accounts could keep accessing leverage.

Once exchanges reportedly restricted those accounts, the buy-side pressure disappeared — and $OM fell roughly 82% in a single week.

Some traders are drawing parallels to $SAHARA , where similar rumors circulated about market maker restrictions being followed by a rapid collapse.

While these claims remain unconfirmed, the broader lesson is familiar:

when price action relies on circular liquidity instead of real demand, the unwind is usually brutal.