Binance : He Yi répond aux rumeurs concernant les listings, la performance des IEO, la part de marché et les ragots sur ses amitiés féminines
TechFlow SélectionTechFlow Sélection
Binance : He Yi répond aux rumeurs concernant les listings, la performance des IEO, la part de marché et les ragots sur ses amitiés féminines
Quelle est la norme de cotation des jetons ? Comment protéger les intérêts des investisseurs individuels lors des IEO ? Le « jeton de copines » existe-t-il vraiment ?
Dédié à des analyses Web3 approfondiesCompilation : BlockBeats
Nine months after Stepn, the crown jewel of Binance IEOs, Binance finally relaunched its IEO program at the end of last year. However, amid a bear market, several IEOs this year have underperformed compared to earlier expectations, sparking some community dissatisfaction. Rumors about "girlfriend coins" continue to spread, and as one of the largest platforms in the industry, newly listed tokens on Binance over the past six months often face significant selling pressure, frequently peaking right upon listing...
Last weekend, in response to these criticisms and concerns from the community, Binance co-founder He Yi addressed them one by one on Twitter.
On June 4, He Yi first responded collectively within the community to recent market rumors and criticisms
1. Binance still cares about wealth effects. You can statistically compare all projects listed today across exchanges and see the percentage that fell below their listing price afterward—currently, we likely remain the best performer;
2. For Launchpad projects, the prices we obtain are the lowest possible rates we can negotiate for users, so anyone securing an IEO allocation generally profits. However, secondary market prices are beyond our control. As for who acquires low-cost positions or sells early, Binance does not interfere—but project teams must follow publicly disclosed vesting schedules, which Binance monitors;
3. Binance has no insider trading, no "relatives' coins," let alone "girlfriend coins." Who do I need to please? I'm already too busy managing Binance. People trying to pull strings to get listed without success invent stories about girlfriends or relatives simply because their projects weren't onboarded.
There aren’t many hot projects in the market; guessing which ones will trend isn't surprising. Now most projects use single-digit token unlocks—something we cannot control. If we don't list trending projects, people criticize Binance; if we list non-hype projects without pre-distributed tokens ("airdrops"), people still complain after buying in. Instead of this noise, why not take a straightforward approach—use data, go through each platform systematically? It’s not difficult.
4. Binance conducts minor layoffs every three months and major ones every six months. Despite the bear market from last year into this year, headcount has doubled, so some optimization is inevitable. Operations remain unaffected, and efficiency improves. Thank you all for your concern.
What are Binance's listing criteria?
@web3xiaoba: Let me summarize Sis He's listing standard briefly: doesn’t care about technology or innovation, only cares about wealth effect. Honestly speaking, those who manage to buy into Launchpad offerings are either gods or bots—I’m just retail left holding bags at higher prices, usually getting rekt by coordinated dumping from institutions and project teams.
He Yi: That’s taking things out of context. My reply specifically focused on wealth effects since that was the topic, emphasizing return on investment, and suggesting comparing performance across all platforms. Technology and innovation are part of the evaluation framework—not the entire picture. Even the sharpest knife becomes just a weapon in a thief’s hands.
@YourAirdropETH: Leaving educational tokens aside, how could Sei—a project founded less than a year ago with a testnet still unusable—secure $80 million in funding? How could such a poor-quality project get listed on Binance? Can you explain what relationship Sei has with Binance? What about Multicoin and Jump—are they related to Binance?
He Yi: See, when Pepe wasn't listed, many complained; once it was listed, even more people complained. Many think Binance is stupid for not listing certain projects, while others clearly see that listing certain tokens would lead to immediate crashes—and then they call Binance stupid too. So Binance needs to strike a balance. When investing in crypto, always do your own research (DYOR), calculate using math instead of blindly following pump calls or angry mobs—don’t let others drag you down.
@YourAirdropETH: The secondary market follows its own rules, but if a project faces widespread criticism, doesn’t that suggest Binance’s project selection strategy has recently gone off track?
He Yi: Back in 2017, there was huge backlash when Binance launched spot trading and issued its exchange token. Sometimes you're just slightly ahead of market recognition. Listing decisions aren't made by any single individual. We try to balance the needs of most users. But rumors and attacks spread faster. I welcome influencers to analyze and compare all projects listed this year.
Don’t blame Binance for Sei not having launched a token yet. Even when they do launch, our listing team will evaluate Sei based on its community strength, data performance, and user feedback. Every community has its own “preferred token” standards—even Bitcoin has plenty of critics. With bear market sentiment low, I’m reminded of the chaotic days of 2019 and 2020, full of scam projects, exploitative models, and infighting among exchanges.
@Kareninyu: This logic is flawed. Since your revenue comes from users, you should either have a vision—following a regulated, Coinbase-like listing standard (though perhaps unrealistic now)—or cater to retail preferences by listing tokens according to community popularity. Yes, many such tokens may be vaporware or speculative, but at least they reflect user choice rather than being selected based on your connections or personal bias.
He Yi:
1) Who says Coinbase listings are “legitimate”? Feel free to compare Coinbase listings too—under U.S. regulatory logic, only BTC and its forks qualify as legitimate.
2) Binance earns money from users, so our underlying listing philosophy focuses on selecting projects that can sustainably grow and deliver returns to users. This reflects differences in research capabilities and judgment. Platforms that consistently identify suitable projects and timing enable their users to thrive longer—that’s our core competitive advantage.
@Kareninyu: By your logic, my research taste aligns closer to Coinbase, yours aligns with your current listings. In today’s crypto space, I can’t really argue against that. Binance itself is already a brand—market makers ensure charts look decent enough. But ultimately, what is the net profit/loss for all retail investors combined, and how much positive impact do these projects bring to crypto? Eventually, facts will speak for themselves.
He Yi: Don’t just focus on today’s crypto scene. Start counting from when Coinbase began aggressively listing altcoins—what exchange doesn’t have market makers? The definitive truth is: whoever stands with users will achieve long-term success.
@RyanYeSan: If something is popular, Binance lists it anyway. There’s no clear regulation or standardized process visible for listings. Shiba Inu’s tech is dog-chewed level, yet every CEX including Binance listed it back then.
He Yi: Hence the balance between quality and quantity. With hundreds of tokens on the platform, investors must conduct their own research rather than blindly follow trends.
@BTCdayu: I must emphasize again: both Sis He and CZ are financially independent—they don’t care about profiting from any specific project. Readers shouldn’t assume petty motives. Binance still operates with the 2019 mindset: prioritizing user profitability. Will IEO participants profit? Of course. Then why has Binance’s reputation declined? Compare with OKX. I can almost 100% predict OKX listings—knowing exactly which tokens will or won’t be listed—because I understand OKX maintains absolute neutrality, focusing solely on whether a project deserves listing. For example: Would PEPE be listed on OKX given its hype? Absolutely yes. At the time, I didn’t think it would make it onto Binance because Binance’s philosophy considers such pump-and-dump schemes harmful to users—the subsequent 70% drop proved that right.
He Yi: Sorry we didn’t fully match your listing expectations. Yet many complain precisely about these single-digit unlock tokens crashing immediately upon listing—how dare they list just to dump on users? Binance reviews tokenomics models but cannot control unlocking percentages. It’s not about controllability—it’s about token and value model design.
@who46504471: To put it bluntly, Binance’s listing criteria help projects dump on retail (you might say unintentionally). But you earn listing fees, and projects recoup costs by dumping on retail. Where do valuations come from? How many are based on real value? Billions in market cap dumped onto retail—everyone knows how this works. Yet you act superior and refuse to change. Once everyone realizes this, your golden days are over.
He Yi: Some small exchanges indeed survive on listing fees—but are you referring to 2017? For individual projects: not listing draws complaints; listing also brings louder complaints. Many think Binance is stupid for skipping certain projects, while others know instantly that listed tokens will crash—so another group calls Binance stupid. Thus, Binance must find a balance—we can’t be accountable for every project’s performance. Investors must still DYOR.
@fengxiao57131: Today’s Binance-listed tokens reach tens or even hundreds of billions in market cap upon debut—isn’t that excessive? From a veteran Binance user since 2017.
He Yi: Most current projects originate from the previous bull market, excessively hyped by capital. Therefore, IEO pricing on Binance is generally lower than previous funding rounds. For direct listings, pricing often reflects existing market prices set by users—we also find these sky-high valuations unreasonable.
Source:
https://twitter.com/heyibinance/status/1665283110479486976
https://twitter.com/heyibinance/status/1665331086342094850
"Girlfriend Coins" & Market Share Criticism
@7thAnthony: Wouldn’t transparent, orderly listing procedures and clear, standardized requirements benefit exchanges? Between two projects in the same sector—one popular but refusing to compromise or submit to exchange “extortion,” the other obscure but connected—whose listing better serves users? I’m not FUDding Binance specifically—all exchanges have issues regarding listings.
Hook had nearly zero community activity—a GameFi platform. When Binance added it to Launchpad, DC had only dozens of daily active users, a newly registered Twitter account with almost no followers. How did Binance notice such a project? No innovation, no traction—today’s metrics exist only because of Binance. What’s really behind Hook? From what I know, Hook is indeed a girlfriend/relative project. Sorry, I can’t disclose my source.
He Yi: For every project listed, others get rejected. Projects with high existing market attention get criticized: “The team lacks tech skills, overdoes Sybil resistance, gives no airdrops, uses tiny unlocks, builds ghost towns”—so Binance gets called stupid. Newer projects are labeled “connected insiders,” unknown and unfamiliar—so Binance gets called stupid again. “Sources” depend entirely on where someone stands and whether they’re benefiting personally.
@7thAnthony: My source is “Xiaomei,” closely connected to you. I never speak publicly about “I heard…” situations. Unless you directly address your connection to Hook, I’ll reveal more inside information.
He Yi: Go ahead and expose it. I have no girlfriends, but many claim to be my “girlfriends,” “relatives,” or “CZ’s friends” and actively promote themselves in the market to secure investments or guarantee listings on Binance. Why do people believe them? Isn’t it partly due to everyone amplifying these rumors yourselves? Next time, go curse her directly.
Source:
https://twitter.com/heyibinance/status/1665326949827325954
@RobertWeb3Miner: After Binance rose to dominance, its market share has steadily declined—clear evidence.
He Yi: I joined Binance in 2017—its market share has never dropped since. Your FUD tactics are far more creative than reality. Keep your head down working, and hold your head high living.
@RobertWeb3Miner: Deliver the trading platform system you sold us back in 2017. Took payment but never delivered—fine to scam money, but don’t skip work. Otherwise, Justin Sun’s HTX will become Binance’s fate under your leadership.
He Yi: Tell me who you contacted to purchase the trading system and provide payment records. I don’t know which exchange you represent, but I never received your money. Whether Binance did, I can check—find the right person responsible. Message me privately. You seem like an old-timer in crypto, yet your tone reeks of resentment—your luck must be terrible. Suggest cursing others less, as backlash harms yourself. Also, Justin Sun is not my former colleague—thank you!
Source:
https://twitter.com/heyibinance/status/1665307653759795200
Regarding IEOs and User Interests
@qkldaliang: Binance dominates unilaterally, developing habits of abusing its power. Binance IEOs should have dedicated internal development teams mass-producing projects, resembling Tencent Games. Initially relying on acquisitions, later shifting toward self-development post-monopoly. Regarding IEOs specifically: you describe them as protecting user interests, but more accurately, they protect long-term BNB holders. Those without BNB, or those who bought BNB solely for IDO participation, gain little benefit.
He Yi: IEOs and Pools are user benefits—Binance users acquire initial or early tokens below market cost or for free. Whether there’s profit—BNB holders likely understand better—and abundant live data supports this. Because these projects launch via Binance, teams’ token unlocks are monitored more closely post-listing. These projects aren’t controlled or operated by Binance—no need to imagine conspiracy theories. Binance has access to top-tier projects in crypto; if negotiations fail, copying them makes us leaders anyway—hence the perception that uncontrollable Binance refuses listings.
@btcpiggy: Recently, Binance’s smaller tokens pose serious issues. Look at your listed IDs—big influencers coordinate pumps, retail gets rekt, orchestrated by project teams. ARPA crashed hard. EDU held an AMA followed by a sharp drop. Lina I can accept; your later adjustments were good. But could you explain the first three tokens? For malicious trading or retail dumping by project teams, can delisting occur?
He Yi: LPD project wallets and market maker accounts are monitored. Currently, LPD requires multi-party custody of project tokens as mutual oversight.
@btcholdermnx: Trusted you, bought BNX and EDU—both completely rekt.
He Yi:
1) If you trusted me, you’d have bought BNB starting in 2017—and I’ve repeatedly said Binance only recognizes BNB;
2) My comment on BNX was back in 2021 when BNX acquired JEX—I advised early JEX holders from 2017 to convert into BNX, which surged from $3–4 during DeFi Summer to a peak of $200 before splitting and declining;
3) Binance IEO project prices are generally below venture funding levels—this is a user benefit. Once again, I endorse no projects besides BNB—please DYOR.
Source:
https://twitter.com/heyibinance/status/1665277339209433088
https://twitter.com/heyibinance/status/1665310067606925315
Products & Others
@Bono47280966: Could you improve interoperability between Web3 wallets and Binance, add more chains, and make transferring funds from exchanges to blockchains easier?
He Yi: Good suggestion—thank you. Binance Web3 Wallet is currently in testing phase and continuously adding support for more chains.
@ccksbhaha: Sis, you previously listed GMX, the leader in Arbitrum’s ecosystem. Can you list the leading project in ZKStack ecosystem earlier this time? I don’t want to be a bagholder again.
He Yi: So, someone remembers that Binance helped boost ARB this year?
@TooLooGAS: After experiencing some things, I feel I shouldn’t judge individuals or companies anymore. I just objectively ask: will EDU and HOOK demonstrate positive value going forward? How can ordinary people extract useful insights—or what significance do they hold for us? (I’m not asking about price.)
He Yi: Follow regular updates and business reports from the teams. Hook is fundamentally an advertising platform; assess EDU based on TinyTap’s revenue and user data health. Ultimately, watch whether these projects can attract non-crypto users and generate real income. During this bear market, if projects keep dumping on users and the ecosystem remains inward-focused, the industry will shrink further.
Bienvenue dans la communauté officielle TechFlow
Groupe Telegram :https://t.me/TechFlowDaily
Compte Twitter officiel :https://x.com/TechFlowPost
Compte Twitter anglais :https://x.com/BlockFlow_News
BlockBeats
