Key Points
Blockchain researcher William Mougayar defended the Ethereum Foundation, arguing critics misunderstand its role within the Ethereum ecosystem.
Mougayar said the Ethereum Foundation was never intended to market ETH, boost token prices or aggressively court institutional investors.
The defense comes after the Ethereum Foundation sold nearly $47 million worth of ETH and unstaked tens of millions more in recent weeks.
Ethereum Foundation Criticism Sparks Pushback
Blockchain researcher and investor William Mougayar has publicly defended the Ethereum Foundation (EF) amid increasing criticism from parts of the crypto community over the organization’s role, ETH performance and recent token sales.
In a lengthy post on X titled “Leave the Foundation Alone,” Mougayar argued that critics are evaluating the Ethereum Foundation using the wrong standards and expectations.
According to Mougayar, many investors mistakenly believe the foundation exists to drive Ethereum’s token price higher, attract institutional capital or aggressively market ETH to the public. He said that was never the organization’s intended mission.
“The asset is money. The infrastructure is shared compute. The Foundation is a non-profit that is steering the protocol toward irrelevance for its own founders,” Mougayar wrote.
He argued that ETH, Ethereum and the Ethereum Foundation are fundamentally different entities with different objectives and trajectories.
EF Focused on Protocol Stewardship, Not Marketing
Mougayar emphasized that the Ethereum Foundation’s primary purpose is protocol stewardship rather than corporate promotion or investor relations.
He described the organization as being on a “subtraction path,” meaning its long-term goal is to reduce its own importance and centrality within the Ethereum ecosystem over time.
According to Mougayar, the foundation is focused on funding long-term research, supporting infrastructure development and hardening the protocol rather than acting as a centralized growth engine for ETH prices.
“It is hardening the protocol so the world does not need it so much,” he wrote.
Mougayar also compared the Ethereum Foundation to internet standards organizations such as the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), arguing that expecting the EF to market ETH is similar to expecting internet protocol organizations to advertise TCP/IP during the Super Bowl.
Ethereum Price Struggles Continue
The debate comes during a difficult period for Ethereum investors.
ETH recently traded around $2,117, gaining nearly 5% over the past 24 hours, but remaining down more than 57% from its all-time high near $4,953 reached in 2025, according to CoinMarketCap data.
The underperformance has fueled growing frustration among some Ethereum supporters who believe the network lacks aggressive leadership, marketing and institutional positioning compared to rivals such as Solana and newer blockchain ecosystems.
Some critics have also questioned whether the Ethereum Foundation’s governance structure and long-term priorities align with investor expectations in an increasingly competitive crypto market.
Ethereum Foundation Continues ETH Sales and Unstaking
The criticism intensified after the Ethereum Foundation recently sold approximately $47 million worth of ETH to BitMine Immersion Technologies through a series of over-the-counter transactions.
Earlier this month, the foundation completed its third OTC sale involving 10,000 ETH at an average price of roughly $2,292 per token, totaling about $22.9 million.
Combined with two previous transactions involving 5,000 ETH in March and another 10,000 ETH earlier this month, the foundation has sold a substantial portion of its treasury holdings in recent weeks.
The Ethereum Foundation also unstaked large amounts of Ether from staking platforms.
It recently unstaked 17,035 ETH worth approximately $40 million, alongside another 21,270 ETH withdrawn from Lido valued at nearly $50 million.
The transactions triggered speculation and criticism from some market participants who viewed the sales and unstaking activity as bearish signals for Ethereum.
Debate Reflects Broader Ethereum Identity Questions
Mougayar’s defense highlights a growing philosophical divide within the Ethereum community regarding the future direction of the network.
Some investors increasingly want Ethereum to behave more like a growth-focused corporate ecosystem that aggressively competes for institutional adoption, capital inflows and retail attention.
Others continue supporting Ethereum’s original decentralized vision, where the protocol functions as neutral public infrastructure rather than a profit-maximizing organization.
The Ethereum Foundation itself has historically maintained that its mission centers on supporting open-source development, decentralization and long-term ecosystem sustainability rather than short-term token performance.
Institutional Competition Intensifies
Ethereum also faces growing competitive pressure from newer blockchain ecosystems that have embraced more aggressive business development and marketing strategies.
Networks such as Solana, Base and Hyperliquid have rapidly expanded user growth and institutional partnerships over the past year, intensifying scrutiny on Ethereum’s slower governance and development approach.
At the same time, Ethereum still maintains the dominant position in decentralized finance, real-world asset tokenization and institutional blockchain adoption.
The network continues to hold the largest share of total value locked across decentralized applications and remains the primary blockchain infrastructure for tokenized financial products and spot Ether ETFs.
Long-Term Vision Versus Market Expectations
The latest debate underscores the tension between Ethereum’s long-term protocol-first philosophy and the shorter-term expectations of token holders seeking stronger price performance and institutional momentum.
While critics continue pressuring the Ethereum Foundation to take a more active role in supporting ETH markets, supporters like Mougayar argue the organization is functioning exactly as originally intended: as a decentralized steward gradually reducing its own influence over the ecosystem it helped create.
Comparison, examination, and analysis between investment houses
Leave your details, and an expert from our team will get back to you as soon as possible
