Veteran Chinese Public Chain NEO's Two Founders in a Feud, Financial Opacity as the Core Reason

marsbitPublicado a 2026-01-01Actualizado a 2026-01-01

Resumen

Summary: A public conflict has erupted between Erik Zhang (Zhang Zhengwen) and Da Hongfei, the two co-founders of the Chinese-origin blockchain project NEO. The core issue is a lack of financial transparency within the NEO Foundation. Zhang, who had left NEO years ago and officially returned in September, accused Da of maintaining a "black box" of assets. He claims Da has sole control over the Foundation's non-token assets and lacks a proper audit mechanism. Zhang also alleged that Da was using NEO's resources to develop a separate project, EON, which prompted his return. The dispute escalated in December when Zhang publicly demanded financial disclosures and unilaterally announced that Da would be removed from NEO mainnet affairs to focus on sidechain and new project development starting January 1, 2026. In response, Da countered that Zhang actually controls the majority of the ecosystem's funds (NEO/GAS tokens) and consensus node voting power. He accused Zhang of delaying the transfer of these funds to a multi-signature wallet for years. Da committed to releasing a financial report for 2025 by Q1 2026.

It's unexpected that a veteran domestic public chain could come to such a day. What's even more lamentable is that top domestic AI projects like Manus, Kimi, and Minimax have had major news for two consecutive days—either being acquired for billions of dollars or raising hundreds of millions in funding—while this old-school public chain has started a feud.

As it stands, the two co-founders of the NEO public chain, founded in 2014, Zhang Zhengwen (Erik Zhang) and Da Hongfei, have essentially completely fallen out, continuing to trade barbs on X. Based on their statements and publicly available information online, let's try to figure out what exactly happened between the two founders of this veteran public chain.

Financial Black Box

Actually, Zhang Zhengwen had left NEO a few years ago, which he confirmed on his own Twitter, and then officially returned in September this year. The trigger for this feud was in November. According to community news and public information, Zhang Zhengwen, as the technical core, encountered obstacles when seeking to obtain the detailed financial report and fund flow of the Neo Foundation.

Subsequently, Zhang Zhengwen accused the Neo Foundation of long-term opaque operations, with its financial status resembling a "black box." He pointed out that Da Hongfei has long solely controlled the foundation's assets other than NEO/GAS tokens, and there is a lack of a complete, auditable disclosure mechanism.

In today's exchange of accusations, we also discovered the reason for Zhang Zhengwen's previous departure. He said that Da Hongfei approached him alone, stating that it was inefficient for the two of them to be responsible for NEO, so he chose to temporarily withdraw from management to "improve efficiency." However, he found that Da Hongfei was using NEO's resources to develop an independent public chain project, EON. This prompted him to return and intervene in the foundation's governance.

In community discussions in November, Zhang Zhengwen stated that NEO had previously relied on hackathons to create "false prosperity," with no real users, and many hackathon projects disappeared after receiving awards.

Escalation of Conflict

In December, Zhang Zhengwen publicly issued a statement demanding that Da Hongfei fulfill the financial disclosure obligations promised since December 9th. More explosively, Zhang Zhengwen unilaterally announced that, according to a previous phone agreement between them, starting January 1, 2026, Da Hongfei will no longer participate in NEO mainnet affairs and will instead focus on the development and operation of the sidechain NeoX and the new project SpoonOS.

Da Hongfei (Da Shu) responded immediately, stating that Zhang Zhengwen actually controls the vast majority of the funds in the NEO ecosystem (including the core assets NEO and GAS tokens) and dominates the voting rights of consensus nodes. He also accused Zhang Zhengwen of delaying the transfer of funds to the foundation's multi-signature address (Multisig) for years under various pretexts (such as waiting for the completion of the N3 migration).

Da Hongfei承诺将在 2026 年第一季度发布 2025 年末的财务报告,并会提前分享初步数据。

Criptos en tendencia

Preguntas relacionadas

QWhat is the core reason for the public conflict between the two co-founders of NEO, as mentioned in the article?

AThe core reason is financial opacity, with Erik Zhang accusing Da Hongfei of controlling the foundation's assets (excluding NEO/GAS tokens) in a 'black box' manner without a complete, auditable disclosure mechanism.

QAccording to the article, why did Erik Zhang initially leave NEO's management?

AHe left because Da Hongfei told him that having two people in charge was inefficient. Zhang agreed to step back temporarily to 'improve efficiency'.

QWhat specific event prompted Erik Zhang to return and get involved in the NEO Foundation's governance?

AHe returned after discovering that Da Hongfei was using NEO's resources to develop an independent public chain project called EON.

QWhat did Erik Zhang unilaterally announce regarding Da Hongfei's role starting January 1, 2026?

AHe announced that, based on a prior phone agreement, Da Hongfei would no longer be involved in NEO mainnet affairs and would instead focus on developing and operating the sidechain NeoX and a new project called SpoonOS.

QHow did Da Hongfei counter Erik Zhang's accusations about financial control?

ADa Hongfei stated that Zhang actually controls the vast majority of the funds in the NEO ecosystem (including the core NEO and GAS tokens) and the consensus node voting power. He also accused Zhang of delaying the transfer of funds to the foundation's multi-signature address for years.

Lecturas Relacionadas

If It's Not a Clear Yes, It's a No: A Nine-Year Retrospective by a VC Who Survived Four Cycles

**"Invest Only When Certain": A Nine-Year Retrospective from a VC Across Four Cycles** IOSG founder Jocy shares hard-earned lessons from nine years and over a hundred investments in Web3. The core challenge isn't identifying successful founders, but understanding why talented founders with solid ideas still fail. Through building a "failed founder database," IOSG identified six recurring failure patterns. **Founder Trait Red Flags:** 1. **Emotionally Unstable:** Founders who react defensively to criticism or publicly lash out under pressure (e.g., 80% drawdowns) often fail. Resilience is key. 2. **Lacking Hunger / Having a Fallback:** Founders with significant safety nets (family wealth, cushy fallback jobs) may lack the "do-or-die" commitment needed to survive crypto's brutal cycles. 3. **Unchecked Ego:** Includes "polished execution machines" who excel in known frameworks but struggle when paradigms shift, and "professor-types" who are technically brilliant but resistant to commercial feedback or coaching. **Project Structure Red Flags:** 4. **Token-First, Not Product-First:** Treating the token solely as a fundraising tool with no real utility or connection to product value is a major warning sign. The project should have value even if the token goes to zero. 5. **No Day-1 Exit Thesis:** Founders must have a clear, staged capital strategy from the start, understanding what each funding round needs to prove to unlock the next. "Exit before entry" is crucial. 6. **No Full-Cycle Experience:** Founders who haven't lived through a complete crypto bull/bear cycle (e.g., 2018, 2022) often underestimate their vulnerability. IOSG limits initial checks for such teams to $250k, sizing for risk. **The Positive Flipside: Desirable Founder Traits** The ideal candidate exhibits: obsessive problem-depth, being a second-time founder with a non-consensus vision, strong communication skills with *controlled* ego, relentless perseverance, and a global perspective with agency and taste (increasingly vital in the AI era). **Three Survival Tips for Founders:** 1. **Cash Flow Over Narrative:** Real revenue is what sustains projects, not vanity metrics. 2. **Tokens Are a Liability:** Avoid issuing a token unless absolutely necessary. The hidden costs (market making, liquidity, compliance) are immense, often a multi-million-dollar burden. 3. **Respect Liquidity:** Sell during peaks to build treasury, buy back to support the protocol during troughs. Be realistic about valuations and your ability to deliver for the next round. The final principle is simple yet paramount: **"If it's a borderline 'yes' or 'no,' don't invest."** In an industry that reinvents itself every few years, the discipline to consistently say "no" is the ultimate secret to longevity.

Foresight NewsHace 23 min(s)

If It's Not a Clear Yes, It's a No: A Nine-Year Retrospective by a VC Who Survived Four Cycles

Foresight NewsHace 23 min(s)

SemiAnalysis Deep Dive into CXMT: $50 Billion Revenue, An IPO Amidst a Supercycle

SemiAnalysis' in-depth report on ChangXin Memory Technologies (CXMT) details its rapid rise as China's largest upcoming semiconductor IPO. Founded in 2016 by Zhu Yiming, CXMT built its DRAM foundation on acquired patents and talent from the bankrupt German firm Qimonda. It achieved its first annual profit in 2025 after nearly a decade of significant capital support, primarily from patient Hefei municipal investors who fostered a local supply chain. The company is now capitalizing on a strong DRAM supercycle. Its revenue soared from ~$3.3B in 2024 to ~$8.6B in 2025, with Q1 2026 alone reaching ~$7.3B. SemiAnalysis projects full-year 2026 revenue could exceed $50B, driven by soaring ASPs rather than massive market share gains. While CXMT is closing the capacity gap with Micron, its product mix remains heavily focused on commodity DDR/LPDDR, which currently offers higher margins than its nascent HBM business. CXMT faces significant challenges in HBM, struggling with yield and stability for HBM3 8-Hi stacks while lagging behind the big three (Samsung, SK Hynix, Micron) in advanced nodes. However, strategic national priorities for AI self-sufficiency may push it to accelerate HBM capacity. Its complex IPO structure reveals heavy state-backed ownership and voting control over its fabs, with Alibaba appearing as both a key cloud customer and a minority shareholder. The IPO aims to raise ~$4.1B, primarily to strengthen its core DRAM manufacturing base.

marsbitHace 43 min(s)

SemiAnalysis Deep Dive into CXMT: $50 Billion Revenue, An IPO Amidst a Supercycle

marsbitHace 43 min(s)

From Corning to Ciena: The 10x Opportunity in the AI Optical Communication Chain

The transition from copper to optical communication in AI data centers is creating significant investment opportunities beyond just chipmakers. The entire photonics supply chain, from glass and fiber to connectors and test equipment, is critical. Corning, a key fiber supplier, has locked in multi-billion dollar, multi-year contracts with major cloud providers (Meta, Amazon, Google, Microsoft, OpenAI, NVIDIA), demonstrating pricing power and scale. Its profit growth is outpacing revenue growth. In the interconnect layer, Amphenol benefits from high growth in AI data centers, driven by strategic acquisitions and operational efficiency, while Credo Technology acts as a bridge between copper and optical solutions, though with high customer concentration risk. At the systems level, Ciena enables higher data capacity on existing fiber lines, with a strong backlog and cloud customer adoption. Further upstream, AXT is a bottleneck supplier of key indium phosphide wafers for lasers but faces geopolitical supply chain risks. VEO Solutions provides essential testing equipment for the entire photonics industry. A new pure-play photonics ETF (FOTO) offers a consolidated investment approach. The core thesis is that the physical limits of copper are driving an inevitable shift to optical technologies, with wealth flowing to essential, often overlooked, suppliers across the photonics value chain.

marsbitHace 55 min(s)

From Corning to Ciena: The 10x Opportunity in the AI Optical Communication Chain

marsbitHace 55 min(s)

Trading

Spot
Futuros

Artículos destacados

Cómo comprar CORE

¡Bienvenido a HTX.com! Hemos hecho que comprar CORE (CORE) sea simple y conveniente. Sigue nuestra guía paso a paso para iniciar tu viaje de criptos.Paso 1: crea tu cuenta HTXUtiliza tu correo electrónico o número de teléfono para registrarte y obtener una cuenta gratuita en HTX. Experimenta un proceso de registro sin complicaciones y desbloquea todas las funciones.Obtener mi cuentaPaso 2: ve a Comprar cripto y elige tu método de pagoTarjeta de crédito/débito: usa tu Visa o Mastercard para comprar CORE (CORE) al instante.Saldo: utiliza fondos del saldo de tu cuenta HTX para tradear sin problemas.Terceros: hemos agregado métodos de pago populares como Google Pay y Apple Pay para mejorar la comodidad.P2P: tradear directamente con otros usuarios en HTX.Over-the-Counter (OTC): ofrecemos servicios personalizados y tipos de cambio competitivos para los traders.Paso 3: guarda tu CORE (CORE)Después de comprar tu CORE (CORE), guárdalo en tu cuenta HTX. Alternativamente, puedes enviarlo a otro lugar mediante transferencia blockchain o utilizarlo para tradear otras criptomonedas.Paso 4: tradear CORE (CORE)Tradear fácilmente con CORE (CORE) en HTX's mercado spot. Simplemente accede a tu cuenta, selecciona tu par de trading, ejecuta tus trades y monitorea en tiempo real. Ofrecemos una experiencia fácil de usar tanto para principiantes como para traders experimentados.

246 Vistas totalesPublicado en 2024.12.13Actualizado en 2026.06.02

Cómo comprar CORE

Discusiones

Bienvenido a la comunidad de HTX. Aquí puedes mantenerte informado sobre los últimos desarrollos de la plataforma y acceder a análisis profesionales del mercado. A continuación se presentan las opiniones de los usuarios sobre el precio de CORE (CORE).

活动图片