# Сопутствующие статьи по теме Token

Новостной центр HTX предлагает последние статьи и углубленный анализ по "Token", охватывающие рыночные тренды, новости проектов, развитие технологий и политику регулирования в криптоиндустрии.

Why Are Crypto Project Acquisitions Now Excluding Tokens?

Recent acquisitions in the crypto space, such as Circle’s purchase of Interop Labs (developers of Axelar Network), have sparked controversy by focusing on acquiring teams and intellectual property while excluding the native tokens. In the Axelar case, the AXL token and network remain independent, leading to a 15% price drop and community backlash. Similar patterns emerged in other acquisitions: Kraken’s Ink acquired Vertex Protocol’s team and tech but abandoned the VRTX token, causing a 75% crash. Pump.fun acquired Padre and invalidated its token without compensation, and Coinbase integrated Vector.fun’s tech without involving the TNSR token. These cases reflect a broader “acquihire” trend common in Web2, where companies acquire talent and tech but avoid equity or token obligations. In crypto, however, this often leaves retail token holders with no rights or financial benefits, as tokens are designed to avoid regulatory scrutiny as securities—offering utility or governance instead of ownership or profit-sharing. This has led to growing tension between project teams and token holders, exemplified by Aave’s recent governance proposal to assert DAO control over IP, equity, and revenue—highlighting the misalignment between token-based incentives and traditional equity structures. The trend raises fundamental questions about the value and rights attached to tokens in decentralized ecosystems.

marsbit12/18 01:12

Why Are Crypto Project Acquisitions Now Excluding Tokens?

marsbit12/18 01:12

Axelar Team Acquired, Token Abandoned: Circle's 'Take the Team, Not the Token' Move Sparks Heated Debate in Crypto Community

Circle, the stablecoin giant, has announced the acquisition of the core team and intellectual property of Interop Labs, the initial development team behind the cross-chain protocol Axelar Network. The move aims to advance Circle’s cross-chain infrastructure strategy and improve interoperability for its core products like Arc and CCTP. However, the acquisition explicitly excludes the Axelar Network itself, its foundation, and its native token AXL, which will continue to operate under community governance. Another contributing team, Common Prefix, will take over Interop Labs' former activities. Following the news, the price of AXL dropped sharply, falling 15% to around $0.115. The “acquire-the-team-but-not-the-token” approach has sparked intense debate within the crypto community. Critics, including VCs and industry figures, argue that the move unfairly disadvantages token holders, who supported the project early on but received nothing from the acquisition. Some have called it a “rug pull” and raised ethical and legal concerns, emphasizing the misalignment between team incentives and token holder interests. Supporters counter that this reflects standard market reality where tokens sit at the bottom of the capital structure—below debt and equity—and aren’t inherently entitled to proceeds in acquisitions. They see Circle’s decision as a rational business move that follows conventional corporate finance hierarchies. The incident highlights a recurring conflict in crypto: the ambiguous legal and economic status of tokens. While often treated as “quasi-equity” during bullish phases, tokens lack formal rights in events like acquisitions or liquidations. The Axelar situation underscores the need for clearer definitions and structures around token rights and incentives.

marsbit12/17 10:05

Axelar Team Acquired, Token Abandoned: Circle's 'Take the Team, Not the Token' Move Sparks Heated Debate in Crypto Community

marsbit12/17 10:05

Circle Acquires Axelar Team but Excludes Token, How Should Token Holders Respond to Value Stripping?

Circle, the stablecoin giant, has announced the acquisition of the core team and technology behind Axelar Network's initial team, Interop Labs, to advance its cross-chain infrastructure strategy. However, the acquisition explicitly excludes the Axelar Network project itself, its foundation, and the AXL token, which will continue to operate independently under community governance. This has led to a sharp 15% drop in AXL's price. The move has sparked significant controversy, highlighting the ongoing debate over "equity vs. token" interests in the crypto industry. Critics, including VCs and industry figures, argue that the acquisition effectively abandons token holders who supported the project, calling it a "rug pull" and morally questionable. They emphasize that while the team and intellectual property were monetized, token investors were left with depreciating assets. Supporters, however, view it as a standard market practice, noting that tokens sit at the bottom of the capital structure in traditional finance, behind debt and equity. They argue that Circle’s decision reflects rational business logic, where acquirers prioritize valuable assets like talent and IP without obligation to token holders. The core issue revolves around the ambiguous legal and economic nature of tokens—often treated as "quasi-equity" during bullish phases but stripped of rights in events like acquisitions. The incident underscores the need for clearer definitions and structures for tokens to protect investors and ensure fairness in future deals.

比推12/16 15:08

Circle Acquires Axelar Team but Excludes Token, How Should Token Holders Respond to Value Stripping?

比推12/16 15:08

Circle's Acquisition of Axelar Sparks Controversy: Giant Wants the Team, Not the Token

Circle, the stablecoin giant, has announced the acquisition of the core team and intellectual property of Interop Labs, the initial developer of the cross-chain protocol Axelar Network. However, the deal explicitly excludes the Axelar Network project itself, its foundation, and its native token AXL. These will continue to operate independently under community governance, with another contributing team, Common Prefix, taking over Interop Labs' former activities. This "acquire-the-team, not-the-token" structure has caused significant controversy and triggered a 15% drop in the price of AXL. The crypto community is divided into opposing camps. The opposition, including VCs and prominent figures, argues the move is a de facto "rug pull." They contend it is unethical for the team and equity holders to profit from the acquisition while token holders, who funded the project's early development, are left with an asset that may now be worthless. Critics state this highlights a fundamental conflict between equity and token-based financing. Supporters, including investment chiefs, defend the move as a normal market behavior. They explain that in traditional capital structures, tokens sit at the very bottom, below debt and equity. In acquisitions, it is standard for higher-priority stakeholders to be paid first, and tokens have no inherent claim to proceeds. They argue Circle acted within existing commercial frameworks by purchasing only the most valuable assets—the talent and IP. The core conflict exposed is the ambiguous legal and economic nature of tokens. They are often narratively treated as "quasi-equity" during good times but are structurally relegated to having no rights in events like acquisitions. This case underscores the urgent need for the industry to define and institutionalize the rights and position of tokens within capital structures.

Odaily星球日报12/16 03:27

Circle's Acquisition of Axelar Sparks Controversy: Giant Wants the Team, Not the Token

Odaily星球日报12/16 03:27

The Governance Struggle Behind the Power Play of Aave DAO and Aave Labs

The article details a governance conflict between Aave DAO and Aave Labs, centering on a dispute over revenue generated by the frontend. The controversy began when Aave Labs replaced the integrated ParaSwap with CoW Swap on its frontend and directed the resulting fees to its private address, rather than to the DAO treasury. An anonymous DAO member, EzR3aL, publicly criticized this move, accusing Labs of privatizing protocol value. Aave DAO represents the protocol layer, governed by $AAVE token holders who vote on proposals. Aave Labs is the development team responsible for building and maintaining the frontend, brand, and product partnerships. The core issue is whether Aave is a decentralized protocol owned by the DAO or a project built and controlled by Labs, and how this distinction affects revenue rights. DAO supporters argue that all value generated should benefit token holders, while Labs contends that frontend-related income rightfully belongs to them. The situation highlights a broader industry-wide governance dilemma: the tension between decentralized community control and the need for a centralized, efficient team to drive development and maintain market position. The article suggests that a potential compromise, such as transparent revenue-sharing agreements, may be necessary. It concludes that how Aave resolves this conflict could set a precedent for other DeFi projects facing similar governance challenges.

marsbit12/15 14:41

The Governance Struggle Behind the Power Play of Aave DAO and Aave Labs

marsbit12/15 14:41

Loss of Tens of Millions in Annual Income Sparks Governance Controversy, Aave Labs Accused of 'Stabbing DAO in the Back'

The recent dispute between Aave Labs and Aave DAO over fee allocation from the CoWSwap integration has exposed deeper governance and value-capture tensions within the Aave ecosystem. Aave Labs switched the default swap integration on its frontend from ParaSwap to CoWSwap, redirecting an estimated $10M+ in annual fees from the DAO treasury to an address controlled by Aave Labs. Aave Labs argues that its frontend is a separate product, not part of the protocol, and has the right to monetize it. Critics, including Aave DAO delegates, contend that the Aave brand’s value was built through DAO-funded efforts, risk management, and community trust, and that the Labs are extracting value that should belong to token holders. The conflict extends to other issues, including the controversial Horizon RWA deployment—which critics say has cost the DAO more than it has earned—and a proposed deployment on MegaETH that bypassed ongoing DAO discussions. The core issue is the blurred line between the protocol, managed by the DAO, and the frontend products, operated by Aave Labs. With Aave V4 intending to move more complexity into abstraction layers, the dispute over who controls—and profits from—the user experience becomes critical for the future of value distribution between equity (Labs) and token holders (DAO).

marsbit12/15 06:56

Loss of Tens of Millions in Annual Income Sparks Governance Controversy, Aave Labs Accused of 'Stabbing DAO in the Back'

marsbit12/15 06:56

Crypto Morning Brief: Strategy Remains in Nasdaq 100, Major Unlocks for ZRO, ARB, STRK Tokens This Week

Crypto Morning Brief: Strategy (formerly MicroStrategy) remains in the Nasdaq 100 index, with Michael Saylor signaling continued accumulation of Bitcoin. This week sees significant token unlocks for ZRO ($37.79M), ARB ($19M), STRK ($13.2M), SEI ($6.93M), and LISTA ($5.34M). In U.S. policy, former President Trump expressed a preference for a new Fed Chair who supports lowering interest rates to 1% or below. The SEC issued new custody guidelines for crypto assets, outlining best practices and risks for investors. The OCC conditionally approved trust bank charters for Ripple, BitGo, Fidelity, Paxos, and Circle. Other notable updates: Moonbirds announced a BIRB token on Solana for Q1 2026; Berachain's Infrared protocol will TGE on December 17; and Coinbase is reportedly planning to launch an internal prediction market. OKX reported that the recent OM token price manipulation was caused by external actors and legal proceedings are underway. China's former bank executive Wang Yongli reiterated the country's firm stance against virtual currencies while pushing for the development of its digital yuan.

深潮12/15 01:19

Crypto Morning Brief: Strategy Remains in Nasdaq 100, Major Unlocks for ZRO, ARB, STRK Tokens This Week

深潮12/15 01:19

Hash Global Founder KK Talks About BNB, Digital Asset Allocation, and Web3 Development Stages

Hash Global founder KK discussed the Web3 industry's development, the role of BNB, and digital asset allocation in a conversation with Jing Peng, CEO of Noah Olive. Key points include: - Web3 has seen progress but also overbuilding; some concepts like SocialFi and GameFi are temporarily unproven but may succeed in future cycles. - Web3 is a network-based technology that requires critical mass, unlike point-specific AI. It transforms business models and relationships subtly. - BNB is the core value carrier of the BNB ecosystem, functioning as a "value-functional token" that integrates utility, ecosystem benefits, and value support from Binance Exchange and BNB Chain. - Binance has over 300M users, and BNB Chain has over 500M, making it a key financial infrastructure. BNB is undervalued but poised for growth similar to茅台 (Moutai) in 2004. - For asset allocation, KK suggests 40% BTC, 20% ETH, and 40% BNB within crypto, emphasizing BNB's high ecological yield (~15% including burns) and growth potential. - Web3 and AI are dual engines of the digital economy; agents and machines will rely on Web3 for value exchange. - Investors should avoid underallocating to Web3, focus on beta assets like BNB, and educate themselves on foundational digital assets.

深潮12/12 10:18

Hash Global Founder KK Talks About BNB, Digital Asset Allocation, and Web3 Development Stages

深潮12/12 10:18

$RAVE TGE Countdown: When Clubbing Becomes On-Chain Economic Behavior, Web3's Breakout Moment Truly Arrives

RaveDAO, a leading Web3 electronic music event organizer, is emerging as a decentralized global entertainment ecosystem. Having successfully hosted over 20 events worldwide with more than 100,000 participants and 80 million online impressions, it has generated $3 million in revenue in 2025 through diverse streams including ticket sales, sponsorships, and NFT memberships. The project is launching its ecosystem token, $RAVE, to deepen connections among participants, artists, brands, and fans. The token will serve as the economic backbone for a participatory economy, enabling functions such as staking for licensing rights, event payments, governance voting, and community rewards. With a total supply of 1 billion tokens, its distribution is heavily community-focused, and a deflationary mechanism is supported by using a portion of event profits to buy back and burn tokens. RaveDAO distinguishes itself by lowering the barrier to Web3 through seamless user experiences, like effortless NFT ticket minting and fiat payment options, and by building a culturally-driven, open ecosystem. Its expansion plan includes 50 global chapters by 2027. The recent sold-out Genesis NFT membership mint further highlights strong community support as RaveDAO positions itself at the intersection of culture, entertainment, and Web3 adoption.

深潮12/11 02:07

$RAVE TGE Countdown: When Clubbing Becomes On-Chain Economic Behavior, Web3's Breakout Moment Truly Arrives

深潮12/11 02:07

Zama Public Sale Too Complicated? A Guide to Understanding Sealed-Bid Dutch Auctions

Zama, a fully homomorphic encryption (FHE) network that has raised $130 million, is conducting a sealed-bid Dutch auction for 10% of its ZAMA token supply. The auction, running from January 12–15, uses FHE to keep bids confidential, ensuring fairness with no front-running, bots, or gas wars. Participants convert stablecoins into encrypted assets before bidding. The clearing price is determined by accumulating demand from highest to lowest bids; those who bid above it get full allocation with refunds, those at the price get pro-rata shares, and those below are refunded. All purchased tokens are fully unlocked at claim. Zama’s mainnet is expected by year-end. The article also highlights ongoing guild tasks for community engagement before the token generation event.

Odaily星球日报12/09 02:45

Zama Public Sale Too Complicated? A Guide to Understanding Sealed-Bid Dutch Auctions