Are Token Name & Symbol Switched?

Alright, I have a weird question:
Aren’t our token symbol and the token name reversed??

What I mean is, everything seems fine on coingecko, i.e. if you search for the token it shows up as “Bamboo (BAM)”, so “Name (SYMBOL)”. But on bscscan, poocoin and the Dextools price bot in the TG chat, the order seems to be turned around like this: “BAM (Bamboo)”, i.e. SYMBOL (Name), with the token name being in brackets, indicating it as the symbol instead and vice versa.

So in the Liquidity Pool, instead of saying “Bamboo/BNB” or “Bamboo/WBNB” as it is right now, it really should be “BAM/WBNB” and “Pooled BAM”, correct?

Am I going crazy and overthinking a non-issue? Or is anybody else confused by this?

Actually, now that I think back, this also happened when I added the token in Metamask; upon pasting the contract, MM auto-filled the symbol as “BAMBOO” instead of just “BAM”.


I just checked the contract’s code, compared it to our test run and I think you’re right, seems those 2 got switched up during contract initialization :confused:


Thanks for the confirmation.

I’m pretty sure I know the answer, but… is there any sort of remedy to this?

Are we just going to double down on it and say “here’s the website for our token BAM with the symbol (Bamboo)”?

I actually thought for a moment I had stumbled on another scam coin, before checking the contract. Or am I the only one that thinks this could be a problem down the line?
Esp. considering future listings (even CMC) etc.

I’ve put in a ticket with BSCScan up update the token and ticker names. It’s an easy fix.

1 Like

Cool, thanks Josh!

Re-reading my comment, I think I came across a bit more hysterical than intended to :sweat_smile:

Hehe, it did come across that way. :grin:

Most of these services that we’re on so far pull information from BSCScan. Getting them to fix it should fix it elsewhere as well.

1 Like

We’re doing a bit of a deep dive to see how this happened. It was either on contract deployment or it is an error on BSCScan’s side.

If a BSCScan issue - then they should fix it.
If it’s a contract deployment issue - then we may consider re-deploying the contract corrected before we start staking. Once the LP is unlocked we could redeploy the contract, then re-lock the LP and then enable staking.

The beauty of having a contract that’s not renounced and the beauty of a shorter term LP lock :slight_smile: It helps when your community can trust that the company/project isn’t going to rug it.