Binance Co-founder Yi He Responds to Competitors' Rumors and Path Dependence, Accusing Them of Hypocrisy and Marketing Tactics
Yi He posted on X in response to competitors' ongoing rumors and smear tactics, accusing them of engaging in club marketing and hypocrisy, buying negative media coverage and KOLs, and projecting their own labels onto others.
She pointed out that some people claim recognition for themselves, believing that without smear tactics, they cannot gain fame and followers, living in a limited game of life and death where they see others' success as their failure; Binance is the industry leader, believing that one’s success is tied to others’ success or failure.
During the industry crisis, Binance used its budget for the "Same Boat Plan" to provide interest-free loans to stimulate recovery. In 2019, Binance relied on its own funds to support users, believing that caring for users leads to success, which is a path dependence; some platforms rely on smear tactics and system manipulation, ultimately blaming Binance for their own failures.
Binance contracts use multi-platform pricing, removing the highest and lowest prices from spot exchanges (including Binance) for liquidation, unafraid of manipulation but unable to resist bot armies; the timeline of industry price fluctuations is clear, and those with common sense can judge. Founders of trading platforms maliciously guide narratives that are both foolish and harmful.
There are countless personal attacks against CZ and Yi He, with years of media manipulation and fake news targeting Binance, which is a path dependence of competitors; on one hand, they wave the flag of compliance, while on the other, they are fined by the EU for being the preferred platform for Hamas and favored by North Korean hackers. How can they claim legitimacy? Have they undergone compliance training, anti-sanction, and anti-money laundering measures?
Labeling oneself is also a path dependence; in the face of slander, there is no need to prove oneself. The best way to handle it is with disdain and indifference; every response is exposure, and the follow-up will be handled legally.
The event-driven attacks from competitors are aimed at public opinion, with funds and resources directed towards user subsidies and compliance responses. The beneficiaries are Binance, which insists on user subsidies, while the pressured parties are the competing platforms that rely on smear tactics and label shifting.
Source: Public Information
ABAB AI Insight
Since Yi He and CZ founded Binance in 2017, they have repeatedly used the platform's own funds to subsidize users in response to market fluctuations, including the 2019 subsidies and the 2025 Same Boat Plan (which provides USDC vouchers to users whose losses exceed 30% of their total assets, not full compensation). Historical paths show that they prioritize user retention as a core growth strategy while facing ongoing accusations from competitors like OKX regarding the 1011 flash crash.
In terms of capital strategy, Binance has invested its budget into the Same Boat Plan and user seed plans to stimulate recovery, shifting resources from trading fee income to direct subsidies and compliance responses. The motivation is to maintain its leading position and reinforce the path dependence of "caring for users," while designing contract pricing to mitigate single-point manipulation risks through multi-platform extreme value removal.
Similar cases include Bitget's public responses and clarifications during user rights protection events, as well as OKX founder Star Xu's repeated public accusations against Binance and competition in media narratives. Currently, Binance is in a phase of consolidating its leadership while facing compliance pressures, responding to public opinion through legal and indifference strategies.
Essentially, this involves a transfer of pricing power and restructuring of the industry chain: competition among exchanges is shifting from technology and liquidity to narrative and compliance labeling. The mechanism is that leading platforms lock in users through subsidies and multi-source pricing mechanisms, while competitors rely on smear tactics, bot armies, and label shifting in an attempt to weaken their opponents' path dependence. However, every public response turns into exposure, ultimately validated by legal and market timelines.
ABAB News · Law of Cognition
- One response equals one exposure.
- Subsidizing users is a path; smear tactics are a dependence.
- Pricing to remove extremes, while public opinion does not remove extremes.