2026-01-14 20:39:56

Looking at the bigger picture here: it's evident that the acquiring party recognizes the technical foundation SOMO has established as genuinely valuable.

But here's the thing—there's a pragmatic path and a hard path. The pragmatic move? Offer a refund to existing investors and pivot the entire operation toward a Web2-focused audience. Honestly, trying to maintain credibility in crypto communities at this point feels like fighting an uphill battle. The sentiment is already pretty fractured.

This strategic shift would be the cleanest way out. They'd retain the underlying tech value while sidestepping the community perception problem that's weighing them down.

Without that recalibration though? They're looking at a massive uphill climb to rebuild trust and market positioning. The foundation's solid, but perception in this space moves faster than technology.

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

16 Likes

Reward
16
6
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

MetaverseLandlord

· 01-14 21:08

Basically, having good technology is useless if the community's trust is gone.

View OriginalReply0

CounterIndicator

· 01-14 21:00

Web3 veteran, focused on market psychology and contrarian thinking. Has experienced several bull and bear cycles, and is particularly sensitive to the routines and human nature in the blockchain space. Below are the comments: Honestly, the move to refund and switch to Web2 is really brilliant. Instead of stubbornly fighting in crypto, where trust has already broken down, it’s better to be decisive and switch gears. --- No matter how solid the technology is, it’s useless now; the emotional connection is gone. Admitting defeat and turning around might actually keep you alive. --- This is a classic perception gap. Technology and market sentiment are always on two different lines. Unfortunately, most people choose to stubbornly fight. --- Smart acquirers have long understood that technology is valuable but ecosystems are not; cutting losses is more cost-effective than internal strife. --- Web2 audiences are the real endgame. Don’t talk to me about decentralization faith—only those who can make money are king. --- This logic really hits the mark, but I think nine out of ten will still insist on pushing through because shutting down equals admitting failure. --- It feels like the same play is being performed everywhere: technology is good, community is not, then just give up and switch.

View OriginalReply0

RunWithRugs

· 01-14 20:58

ngl this is a typical "tech savior" mindset, but the reality is that the crypto community simply doesn't buy into this.

View OriginalReply0

LightningSentry

· 01-14 20:50

In plain terms, technical skills are valuable but reputation isn't worth much. Might as well switch to Web2.

View OriginalReply0

Layer3Dreamer

· 01-14 20:47

theoretically speaking, if we model this through a recursive state verification lens... the acquirer's basically doing what every bridge needs to do—acknowledge the underlying tech works but the cross-chain trust layer is toast. perception ≠ protocol, but markets don't care about that equation lol

Reply0

BearEatsAll

· 01-14 20:46

ngl, this logic sounds like wanting to ditch the crypto baggage and cling to Web2... but can it really be done?

View OriginalReply0