Bread isn't saying it here, but I'm going to give a a very liberal translation that
@megaeth realized that some teams/apps are only looking to buy a new house for the founders *cough* noise, hellotrade, GTE *cough* instead of building an actual product that utilizes Mega Infra. Every time an app or product leaves for the highest bidder, it makes Mega look like a fool for allowing a product to leave, damaging Mega's reputation and allowing publicity to be controlled by a 3rd-party product rather then Mega getting to control the narrative of their chain.
Solution? If you want someone to build a mega aligned app, do it yourself.
If you've been a part of the MegaETH community, you would have seen
@ZokuTrade or possibly saw mention of it in one of the many community chats. If you haven't seen it yet, take a good look.
"Trading Infrastructure for Consumer Applications on
MegaETH" is something that could rewrite the entire industry surrounding the blockchain if properly combined with M(OS)S. I have a tremendous amount of respect for Mega doubling down on this right now. We all fantasize about the future of a world that builds everything on the blockchain, it seems Mega is the only eco trying to build tools that make that possible. Very excited to see the comms that come after the USDM from Terminal gets distributed.
Looks like the next week might hold some promise.
It's just mismanaged expectations, which are downstream of a shifting ecosystem and value accrual landscape.
To date, what we've done is a healthy mix of tried and net-new mechanisms.
New:
- Our own accelerator for app building on a chain that didn't exist yet
- How we approached raising (from everyday users)
- Opinionated tech that is (still) well-beyond the performance landscape of the entire crypto ecosystem and offers novel mechanisms (native oracle)
- Day 0 native stablecoin for value capture
Old:
- Terminal / Points program
- Broad ecosystem support (even if lower than more-mature and well-capitalized ecos)
A lot of the items from the "New" category was because we saw the change in tides for infrastructure coming, and aimed to get in front of it. The stuff in the "Old" category were attempts to preserve what has worked in the past.
With Terminal shutdown, we're acknowledging that crypto as it was, and the playbooks that come with it, don't fit in 2026 unless you're as-well capitalized as those same infra projects from the 2021 vintage.
Even then; the outcome of spending all of that time and energy while competing with massively capitalized and mature competitors is a an ecosystem with very little value capture for itself.
So we adjust, reflect, and enter the next era of Mega.
That does not mean crypto users are bad, or CT is extractive, etc, etc - it's just an acceptance that the path where we deviated from net-new outcomes and Mega value capture left too much out of our direct hands and we didn't like where that ended up. The numbers didn't make sense for us or our users.
Going forward we intend to have a more-focused approach on where we direct our time and energy, which includes focusing that time and energy on ourselves and what we can bring to market.
Some people are going to disagree with that (app teams included). That is fine. If what we were doing was consensus I'd be worried.
All of the decisions being made is because we see where crypto is headed and are in the unique position as a young ecosystem to fully embrace and mold towards it. We do that because we want to win.