Original Title: (Amidst Rumors, What Is True and What Is False About Binance's Exorbitant Listing Fees?)

Original Author: shaofaye123, Foresight News

The listing fees of exchanges have always been a focal point of industry attention. Discussions on whether there are indeed exorbitant listing fees are not new. In 2018, Binance was questioned about requiring a listing fee of $1 million for tokens. Other exchanges also became embroiled in the topic, with claims of 10 ETH, 20 BTC, and 500,000 Tokens, making it difficult to discern truth from fiction. Binance also announced in October 2018 that it would make listing fees transparent and donate them to charity. In 2022, due to the MITH deposit refund incident, Binance's listing fees once again fell into the whirlpool of public opinion. Recently, with the CEO of Moonrock Capital exposing a $100 million listing fee on Twitter, rumors and criticisms regarding Binance's exorbitant listing fees have once again become the center of discussion.

Event Summary

On November 1, the CEO of Moonrock Capital, a native cryptocurrency consulting and investment firm, spoke out on Twitter. He claimed that Binance required a certain potential project to provide 15% of its total token supply to ensure its listing on the centralized exchange, which accounted for 15% of the total token supply, valued at approximately $50 million to $100 million.

The incident then began to gain traction, with the post's views exceeding one million, and more and more KOLs started to participate in the condemnation or support.

Brian Armstrong, co-founder of Coinbase, also issued a statement on this matter, asserting: 'Coinbase's listing is free.'

However, Coinbase, which intended to showcase the spirit of decentralization and fairness, was quickly exposed for not only charging listing fees but also for significant amounts.

Andre Cronje, co-founder of Sonic Labs, claimed on Twitter that 'Binance does not charge listing fees, but Coinbase has repeatedly requested fees, quoting $300 million, $50 million, and $30 million, with the most recent quote being $60 million.' This response sparked widespread discussion, and the event escalated. Some questioned whether Andre might have contacted fake Coinbase listing workers, while Andre stated he could provide all evidence for the public to verify. 'I have not signed a confidentiality agreement, so I am very willing to provide relevant proof (the asking prices came from multiple employees/departments at Coinbase, raised over the years via email, Telegram, and Slack). Coinbase can argue that this is not a listing fee, but an earning fee; however, this will still translate into the project's listing cost.'

He Yi's Response

The discussion remains heated, and Binance co-founder He Yi also responded, claiming that there is no so-called listing fee and that the airdrop ratios and rules in collaboration with project parties are clear and transparent, not dependent on whether the project parties provide tokens to determine their listing eligibility. Furthermore, Binance has a strict listing screening mechanism.

He Yi stated on Twitter,

· FUD: If a project does not pass the screening process, no matter how much money or what percentage of tokens, it cannot be listed on Binance.

· DYOR: Projects that have already been listed on Binance have clear introductions in the token distribution section. Please analyze the percentages yourself to determine whether there is indeed a so-called 20%, 15%, etc.

· Airdrops: The airdrop rules for Binance's Launchpool and other listings are transparent and clear, but that does not mean that all projects willing to give airdrops can be listed on Binance. If you have 20% of tokens you want to collaborate with Binance for an airdrop, feel free to work with our Web3 wallet.

FUD will never disappear, but it makes us stronger. Gossip is easy to generate traffic, and business competition is always filled with dark sides; once you understand the rules that govern this world, you will no longer be easily swayed by rumors, thus gaining the ability to think independently.

It is people like AC, who bravely speak the truth amidst the noise, that the community truly respects.

Regarding listing fees, opinions among KOLs and the public are divided. Some believe that listing fees are part of the operational costs of exchanges and can serve as a way to filter project quality. Others argue that listing fees may hinder some promising but underfunded projects from being listed, affecting market diversity and competitiveness.

Looking at Industry Development through Listing Fees

In 2018, 2022, and 2024, it seems that the controversy over listing fees is brought up periodically. Cryptocurrencies are centered around the spirit of decentralization, yet the listing fees of centralized exchanges always shroud the topic in mystery. From a business perspective, it may be reasonable for exchanges to charge certain listing fees, as they need to invest resources to evaluate projects, ensure compliance, and maintain platform operations. However, the collection of fees should be transparent and fair, and excessive fees should not become barriers to innovation.

The controversy over listing fees continues, and what we see is a strong demand from practitioners for transparency and fairness. Binance's proactive response has alleviated market concerns to some extent, highlighting the necessity for exchanges to be more transparent and fair in their listing policies. However, the industry's development should not stop at listing fees; project parties should pay more attention to the quality and sustainability of their projects. Each phase's focus on listing fees reflects a demand for a fairer and more transparent market environment. This often signifies the emergence of a new turning point, with the industry needing truly valuable projects to stand out.

Original Link