Basically these scams try to conceal the cost of securing a Proof of Work blockchain by deliberately not securing the blockchain. Their main reason for not implementing merged mining is that merged mined coins tend to reflect (price-in) in their market cap the cost of securing a blockchain.
The bait and switch scamcoin miners do not want thier scams to reflect the cost of securing a bolckchain, and since they have no intention of actually securing blockchains, preferring to keep spamming out new coins to keep doing the bait and siwtch over and over again, it is correct for the scamcoin blockchains not to reflect the cost of securing the chain. But, for a while in the past and likely still to some degree even now, the market caps of these bait-and-switch scams have not seemed to reflect the fact that they are insecure garbage. Their market caps have been reflecting the lack of cost for security gained by deliberately not being secure, being in fact designed to be insecure and even maybe not practical to secure, but have not properly reflected the fact that they are not secure.
Maybe largely because they are mostly the realm of bait and switch scam miners and ponzi scheme promoting "speculators" both of whom do not care about securing the chains since both will be moving on next day or later in the day or whenever some profitability website says so to another similar scam, the scam of the day or scam of the hour so to speak.
-MarkM-
I think I counted 15 occurrences of the word 'secure' or some variation thereof and 12 instances of the word 'scam' in your post.
Just what is the point you are trying to make ? L)L
Use of malicious negative trust to suppress free speech discredits the bitcoin community