Is Celestia's “staking revolution” behind the PoG proposal, or is it a 100 million yuan shipping interpretation?

TIA, the “deposit shovel” that no one cares about now, has once again faced a crisis of public opinion in the community. In a period where prices were falling for a long time and narratives were gradually being marginalized, Celestia's network revenue continued to be sluggish and the viability of the DA circuit was challenged. Against this backdrop, its co-founder John Adler proposed a disruptive governance proposal.

Cancelling the pledge, Celestia wants to change the life of “POS”

Co-founder John Adler recently proposed a disruptive governance proposal, arguing that the network should completely abandon the current proof-of-stake (PoS) mechanism and instead adopt a “proof-of-governance (PoG)” (Proof-of-Governance (PoG)) model. As soon as the proposal was proposed, it sparked a buzz in the crypto community, pointing directly to the core concept of the blockchain governance structure.

If the plan is adopted, the Celestia network will undergo a series of structural restructurings: First, the issuance of TIA tokens will be cut by about 20 times, greatly reducing circulation inflation, and the corresponding reduction ratio is as high as 95%. Second, existing entrustment pledge and liquidity pledge contracts will be completely abolished, and the on-chain governance mechanism will be terminated simultaneously.

The total amount of TIA's new issuance will be paid to validators as off-chain incentives for operating nodes; validators are no longer selected through token voting, but are determined through an off-chain governance mechanism. Additionally, Celestia will use a fee burning mechanism to give back to coin holders, and approximately $100 to $300 of daily protocol revenue will be directly used for TIA value support.

Adler even advocates the complete removal of the concept of “staking.” He believes that in a situation where there are no more token issuance rewards and no reliance on pledge voting to select validators, the act of “staking” becomes superfluous, LST also loses its foundation of existence, and TIA itself becomes a direct vehicle for value capture.

Adler's proposal is essentially aimed at addressing the prolonged downward inflationary pressure on TIA prices and injecting basic logic into the long-term value of the network by constructing a scarcer and more compact token economy model.

But at the same time, the solution also challenges several assumptions taken as “taken for granted” in the mainstream Ethereum consensus, such as whether blockchain economic security actually relies on a punishment mechanism (slashing), whether PoS is actually a “proof of authority” mechanism with authority (a variant of PoA), and whether the blockchain system can operate sustainably through a “no-governance profit model.” If adopted, this proposal will not only restructure Celestia's economic model, but may also challenge the current Ethereum-dominated pledge governance logic.

Source: Blockworks Research.

However, even when this governance proposal aimed at “rebuilding the foundation of the token economy” had not yet been implemented, the community revealed one after another the Celestia team's massive cashing out behavior, causing the outside world to interpret the original purpose of the proposal in a mixed manner. On the one hand, the project side emphasized that the PoG model is expected to curb inflation, repair the token model, and revive market confidence; on the other hand, on-chain data showed that many core team members quickly completed large monetization operations after opening the unlock window, and accumulated more than 100 million US dollars in cash out, causing market questions.

Is this deflationary reform actually for TIA's long-term value, or is it a cover for the system after the team “ships at a high level”? In a context where TIA has declined by 92% and user trust continues to be lost, Celestia's “modular vision” is facing an unprecedented crisis of trust.

Is shipping king?

Community user @0xCircusLover's tweet alleges that the Celestia core team is seriously opaque at various levels, including token unlocking, fund operation, and market promotion. This revelation was described by some observers as revealing Celestia's “criminal model,” triggering strong questions from the market about the internal governance and conduct of the project.

According to its disclosure, Celestia executives completed the TIA token unlocking as early as early October 2024, and team members' unlocking began shortly thereafter. Over the next few months, a number of key figures were revealed to have been able to cash out large sums through OTC transactions or resource swaps. For example, project co-founder Mustafa is accused of monetizing more than $25 million through OTC channels and has moved to Dubai, while Andy, another key figure, is being charged with receiving payment to promote TIA, while Yaz was expelled and withdrawn from the coin community due to allegations of sexual harassment. The user claims to have relevant victim information and evidence of the delivery transaction, and plans to release full materials in the near future.

Additionally, he mentioned that Celestia paid seven figures of dollars to the well-known agency Abstract in exchange for “breaking away” from rival Eigen's partnership and paying media personalities Jon Charb and Bankless to maintain a positive image of the project. This series of money operations was accused by those who broke the news as typical operations of “paid propaganda.”

Another focus of controversy was the role of Bankless anchor David. The community questioned that he frequently spoke out for TIA but had no experience in actually using Celestia's data availability services or building agreements. Instead, he was conflicted about whether he held TIA tokens in numerous public statements, raising widespread questions about the impartiality of his remarks.

Although the revelation has yet to receive an official response, it has caused a crisis of trust within some circles, particularly in the context of pressure on TIA's current market prices and continued employee sell-offs. Celestia once became popular with its “modular data availability” narrative, but now, a series of questions surrounding its core team's governance, public opinion manipulation, and capital flow are plunging this once highly anticipated project into an unprecedented PR crisis.

“There's actually evidence everywhere in the crypto community, but no one wants to talk about it publicly because 'they're too big. '”

Earlier, crypto KOL Mosi provided a copy of Celestia's internal team token distribution and monetization data sheet, showing that the team members had sold a total of about 9.43 million TIA, and the cumulative cash volume was estimated to be as high as $109 million based on current market prices. These tokens all fall under the “Team” category and are owned by early core members and contributors.

The biggest selling address is celestia1erglsz... 2,609,516.29 TIA have been sold, corresponding to $27,368,523.82 in cash. Multiple addresses sold for more than one million dollars, indicating that the team actively monetized in the early stages of token unlocking.

At the bottom of this tweet, a user quoted Celestia COO Nick White as a mockery. “I've never sold a TIA” echoes the $100 million image above.

In October of last year, Celestia announced “the completion of a $100 million financing” on the eve of a major unlocking, which once raised optimistic expectations in the community about its financial strength. However, according to crypto investor Sisyphus, the financing was actually an OTC transaction that was completed a few months ago, and the tokens involved will be unlocked centrally in October. This kind of behavior is viewed by some community members as typical information manipulation: “First, go out of the market, then package it as a benefit, and finally guide retail investors to take over before unlocking the window.”

Although Celestia's current valuation is estimated at $3.5 billion, its real revenue is far from supporting such an inflated valuation. According to public data, Celestia's average daily contract revenue is less than 100 US dollars, and the annualized potential is only around 5 million US dollars. Industry insiders generally point out that Celestia's market pricing is more like a premium advance on a “future story,” rather than based on existing usage data or business models. Because of this, once market sentiment cools down, its valuation bubble can easily be squeezed.

In the face of all kinds of accusations and public opinion surrounding Celestia, Celestia's founder publicly stated that although the current market is full of “increasingly outrageous FUD, all the founding members, early employees, and core engineers are still on duty. It also revealed that Celestia currently has more than $100 million in capital reserves and sufficient cash flow to support more than 6 years of operation.

“To survive in this industry, every project has to go through ups and downs. Almost every coin will experience a 95% slump once in its lifetime, which is the norm rather than the exception,” Mustafa wrote in a tweet. TIA is now 92% from its high point.