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

marsbitPublicado em 2026-01-01Última atualização em 2026-01-01

Resumo

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。

Criptomoedas em alta

Perguntas 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.

Leituras Relacionadas

Agent Race Ends, Super Workbench Takes Over

The era of fragmented AI agents is ending. Over the past month, China's tech giants—Tencent, Alibaba, and ByteDance—have simultaneously shifted strategy: instead of launching new, standalone AI agents, they are consolidating their various agent projects into unified "super workbenches." Tencent integrated its QClaw teams into WorkBuddy, a strategic product hailed as a potential third flagship after QQ and WeChat. Alibaba is merging its QoderWork, Wukong, and MuleRun agents into a new "Qianwen Office" platform under DingTalk's leadership. ByteDance rebranded its TRAE SOLO coding agent to TRAE Work, signaling a broader focus on workflow collaboration. This convergence marks a pivotal industry consensus. The initial exploration phase, where companies rapidly built numerous overlapping agents for different scenarios, proved costly and inefficient. With open-source tools eroding technical barriers, competition has shifted from agent creation to resource consolidation and cost control. Historically, platform wars are won not by creating more products, but by simplifying them—as seen with browsers unifying web access and super-apps consolidating services. Now, the "super workbench" aims to become the unified AI entry point for work. This reflects a deeper market realization: the primary audience for AI is no longer just programmers (a market in the tens of millions) but all knowledge workers (a market of billions). The real opportunity lies in augmenting everyday tasks—managing emails, documents, data, and meetings—across the entire workday. The core battleground is becoming control over the primary AI entry point that employees use daily. Tencent's WorkBuddy leverages WeChat and Tencent Docs; Alibaba's Qianwen Office taps into DingTalk's organizational data; ByteDance's TRAE Work integrates with Feishu's workflows. Whoever owns this "super workbench" gains strategic control over orchestrating enterprise data and APIs. This shift is redefining enterprise software. Traditional SaaS applications, valued for their user interfaces, will recede into the background. Their core functionalities will be exposed as standardized "Skills" or APIs for the super workbench's agents to invoke. Software value will shift from selling user seats to charging based on API calls and outcomes delivered. The evolution of agents is moving through clear stages: first as novel standalone products, then as consolidated primary work entry points, and finally as pervasive, invisible capabilities embedded into the digital fabric. The recent moves by major tech firms signal the transition from the first stage into the second, accelerating toward the third. In the end, the most successful agent technology may become invisible—like electricity or the HTTP protocol—a fundamental, unnamed infrastructure powering work itself.

marsbitHá 3m

Agent Race Ends, Super Workbench Takes Over

marsbitHá 3m

Michael Saylor: 110 Reasons to Oppose BIP-110

Michael Saylor presents 110 arguments against Bitcoin Improvement Proposal (BIP) 110, a soft fork aimed at restricting certain non-monetary data storage uses (like inscriptions) on the Bitcoin blockchain. He acknowledges the proponents' valid concerns—such as node costs, fee pressure, and preserving Bitcoin's monetary focus—but fundamentally disagrees with the proposed solution. Saylor argues that BIP 110 represents a dangerous precedent of using consensus rules to enforce value judgments on transaction validity, moving away from Bitcoin's core principles of neutrality and permissionless innovation. His key objections are organized into eleven categories: 1) It violates neutrality and hard consensus by banning currently valid transactions. 2) It fails to meet the high burden of proof required for a consensus change, lacking concrete data on the alleged crisis. 3) Its seven bundled technical restrictions are overly broad, targeting generic script functionalities and blocking future upgrade paths. 4) It sacrifices compatibility and future optionality by closing off designed upgrade hooks. 5) Its temporary rules add significant complexity (grandfathering, expiry states) without sufficient justification. 6) The economic and security impacts, particularly on miner revenue and fee markets, are uncertain and unmodeled. 7) Superior, market-based tools (fee markets, relay/mining policies) already exist to manage blockchain load. 8) It stifles innovation by creating a chilling effect for developers. 9) Its modified activation mechanism (55% threshold, forced signaling) is aggressive and risks network splits. 10) The precedent it sets—using consensus to suppress disliked but legal uses—is more dangerous than the problem it aims to solve. 11) A better path exists: improving measurements, refining resource-based policies, and allowing market forces to work. Saylor concludes that Bitcoin's strength lies in its neutral rules, open markets, and hard consensus. Changing these foundational elements to target specific use cases is an unnecessary and risky "iatrogenic" intervention. He advocates for guarding Bitcoin's neutrality rather than acting as its redeemer.

marsbitHá 19m

Michael Saylor: 110 Reasons to Oppose BIP-110

marsbitHá 19m

Trading

Spot

Artigos em Destaque

Como comprar CORE

Bem-vindo à HTX.com!Tornámos a compra de CORE (CORE) simples e conveniente.Segue o nosso guia passo a passo para iniciar a tua jornada no mundo das criptos.Passo 1: cria a tua conta HTXUtiliza o teu e-mail ou número de telefone para te inscreveres numa conta gratuita na HTX.Desfruta de um processo de inscrição sem complicações e desbloqueia todas as funcionalidades.Obter a minha contaPasso 2: vai para Comprar Cripto e escolhe o teu método de pagamentoCartão de crédito/débito: usa o teu visa ou mastercard para comprar CORE (CORE) instantaneamente.Saldo: usa os fundos da tua conta HTX para transacionar sem problemas.Terceiros: adicionamos métodos de pagamento populares, como Google Pay e Apple Pay, para aumentar a conveniência.P2P: transaciona diretamente com outros utilizadores na HTX.Mercado de balcão (OTC): oferecemos serviços personalizados e taxas de câmbio competitivas para os traders.Passo 3: armazena teu CORE (CORE)Depois de comprar o teu CORE (CORE), armazena-o na tua conta HTX.Alternativamente, podes enviá-lo para outro lugar através de transferência blockchain ou usá-lo para transacionar outras criptomoedas.Passo 4: transaciona CORE (CORE)Transaciona facilmente CORE (CORE) no mercado à vista da HTX.Acede simplesmente à tua conta, seleciona o teu par de trading, executa as tuas transações e monitoriza em tempo real.Oferecemos uma experiência de fácil utilização tanto para principiantes como para traders experientes.

333 Visualizações TotaisPublicado em {updateTime}Atualizado em 2026.06.02

Como comprar CORE

Discussões

Bem-vindo à Comunidade HTX. Aqui, pode manter-se informado sobre os mais recentes desenvolvimentos da plataforma e obter acesso a análises profissionais de mercado. As opiniões dos utilizadores sobre o preço de CORE (CORE) são apresentadas abaixo.

活动图片