2026-01-08 14:32:33

ZEC has experienced a sharp decline in the past couple of days, with nearly 10 consecutive bearish candles on the 4-hour chart, dropping straight from around $480 to just over $400. The price has fallen by 15-20% within a day, evaporating several hundred million dollars in market value. Honestly, it’s hard to watch.

Upon closer inspection, the reason is actually that the core development team of Electric Coin Company has all left. Led by CEO Josh Swihart, the entire technical team collectively submitted their resignations. This may seem sudden, but the underlying conflicts have been brewing for a long time. The team and the non-profit board of regulators had serious disagreements over Bootstrap, the project’s governance and employment terms were changed, and the development team felt they could no longer work normally. Both sides have always disagreed on the project’s privacy mission and development direction. The CEO publicly described this as a "constructive dismissal."

The departing team is now preparing to start anew, establishing a new company to continue developing that set of "unstoppable private currency" technology. The protocol itself is open source, the network remains stable, and there are no immediate technical risks. But the question is—who will be responsible for subsequent maintenance, upgrades, and new feature development? That’s the big uncertainty.

This incident serves as a reminder. When trading cryptocurrencies, simply watching K-line charts isn’t enough; you need to see whether the pillar supporting the project’s long-term value is truly solid. ZEC’s core competitiveness lies in its powerful privacy encryption scheme (zk-SNARKs technology). Once the core team splits, this foundation is directly shaken, and market confidence collapses immediately. Such intense volatility caused by internal conflicts is a warning—don’t rush to buy the dip. The market’s attention is very likely already shifting to the new project that the departing team is about to launch—using the same technology stack, with the same talent team, but with many uncertainties.

ZEC13,33%

View Original

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.

22 Likes

Reward
22
7
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

gas_guzzler

· 01-11 12:47

This is a disaster now, the entire team has run away, how can we continue? No matter how cheap, I dare not touch it. --- It's the board of directors causing trouble again. If the developers run away, the project is finished. I've seen too many of these tricks. --- Wait, isn't the new company using the same technology with two versions of zk-SNARKs? The crypto world fears this kind of split the most. --- I just want to know if the people taking over are out of their minds or genuinely optimistic about the future development. Who dares to gamble on this risk? --- Haha, being betrayed by the board and still blaming the market, this CEO move is really top-notch. --- No risk in the short term is suspicious. Once the core team disperses, what’s the point of open-source protocols? --- Bottoming out? Wake up, the team has already moved to the new company. The old project is just a retirement home now. --- Basically, it’s internal fighting. In the end, we retail investors are the ones paying the price. Old tricks again. --- No matter how strong zk-SNARKs are, they can't save a project with a broken team. This time, ZEC is really hurt.

View OriginalReply0

bridge_anxiety

· 01-11 09:44

Damn, did the entire team run away? Now ZEC is really out of the game, and those who bought the dip will have to suffer losses. What about the new project? Can trust be restored? Can the board stop messing around and constantly changing the rules? This time I’ve truly learned my lesson. Focusing only on technology isn’t enough; if the team’s morale collapses, everything is over.

View OriginalReply0

WalletManager

· 01-08 15:01

The core team has left, and zk-SNARKs technology has become a sword hanging over us. We need to observe calmly this time. It's not the right moment to buy the dip. --- Did the departing team start from scratch with new technology? The real issue is who will maintain the ZEC main chain, and that’s where the risk lies. --- A 15-20% drop looks fierce, but the real problem is governance collapse. On-chain data remains stable, so there's no short-term risk, but who knows what the long term holds. --- It's a common topic; knowing how to read K-line charts isn't enough, but when it comes to critical moments, there's no avoiding it. Team split > technical issues, and that judgment is correct. --- Just keep your private keys tight; internal chaos like this won't affect the chain's operation itself. The development of new features is problematic—let's wait and see the follow-up progress. --- Interesting, the collective departure of developers directly breaks through psychological price levels. The real risk has never been on the K-line, but in people's minds. --- As long as the protocol is open-source and the network remains stable, there's still hope. The key is whether those who left can truly support new projects. The variables are indeed significant. --- This is what truly increases the risk factor. It's not a technical bug but a fatal flaw in governance structure.

View OriginalReply0

SelfCustodyBro

· 01-08 14:56

Wow, the entire team has left? Can we still watch ZEC? It feels like without those people, the technology is just an empty shell.

View OriginalReply0

0xSoulless

· 01-08 14:49

Once the core team runs, half the projects die—that's the usual operation in the crypto world. --- Internal conflicts and board disputes—these messes are more ugly than candlestick charts. --- 15% gone in a day, and the retail investors are still debating whether to buy the dip. The big players have already run. --- Interesting, the technology is fine, but everyone has left. So who is actually maintaining this thing? --- The departing team launches a new project—do they dare to continue to cut another wave? --- No matter how powerful zk-SNARKs are, they can't withstand the team collectively lying flat. This lesson is harsh enough. --- Don't be naive. Buying the dip in such internal chaos coins is like directly throwing money away. Wait and see what tricks the departing team plays. --- Changing rules by the board caused all the tech geniuses to leave—an example of self-inflicted death. --- Once regulatory authorities step in, the project is gone. The fate of privacy coins is this bitter.

View OriginalReply0

SerumSquirrel

· 01-08 14:45

Really can't hold it anymore, the entire team has left and they still want us to stick with this shell, it's hilarious. If the core team all leaves, anyone would be knocked down, what do they mean by constructive dismissal? The key is, if the new team can really continue the technology, then ZEC is useless. Let's wait and see what tricks those who resigned will pull, all the technology is still there. The board of directors is at odds with the development team, and in the end, we coin holders are the ones who suffer, so angry.

View OriginalReply0

ChainWanderingPoet

· 01-08 14:44

Manipulating the board of directors and forcing the team to leave—this is a common problem in Web3 projects. It's either internal team conflicts or uncertain technical prospects. ZEC has indeed been hit hard this time. The core developers have all left. Who will maintain this protocol? Has no one thought about that? The new team developing the same technology independently is essentially a hard fork. How will the ecosystem choose sides then? Don't buy the dip; wait and see how the new project develops. That's the smart move. Keep an eye on that departing team—they hold the technology and talent. The new company might actually be more valuable. ZEC's privacy features were originally a selling point, but now they've been completely undermined. What a pity. A fallout between the board and the developers essentially signals the death of the project. The market has already sensed it.

View OriginalReply0