С этого момента все ICO должны раскрывать структуры капитала, а не только токеномику. Покупка токенов, не зная, кто владеет компанией и где накапливается ценность, — это слепые инвестиции. Если проект скрывает свою структуру капитала, он заслуживает общественного давления.

The situation around the @aave DAO clearly shows, in my view, that 2026 has the potential to become the year of token-to-equity transformation, largely driven by a more favourable regulatory environment in the US. (In many ways, this mirrors what @centrifuge and @caesar_data are already starting to implement) 👉 Because…successful protocols almost always run into the same structural issues 👇 The more abstraction increases, through vaults, routing, and automation, the more value shifts toward the product layer, i.e. the interface. And everyone understands where the real money will eventually flow: through the application, if mass adoption materialises. What is often problematic in these token-based economic stories is the lack of clarity. Value flows tend to be deliberately blurred, making it difficult for tokenholders to plan and assess their economic exposure properly. That is precisely why tokens need to evolve into equity-like instruments, with a clear economic framework, and why a portion of that equity should then be allocated to those building and operating the application. But we need to stop pretending both models can coexist indefinitely. You cannot play a double game, capturing value at the product level while maintaining tokenholder expectations, and expect it not to break trust. You can’t have your cake and eat it too.