I've been following Midnight from very early on, and I have to admit this is a quite rare case. A new blockchain launched in 2026 with no VC backing at all. No big funds, no preferential private sale rounds. Instead, tokens are distributed through Glacier Drop to the Cardano, Bitcoin, and other ecosystem communities. Charles Hoskinson personally invested 200 million USD to fund it. Philosophically, I see this as a very correct decision.

That is what is called a fair launch — a token distribution method where no investor group holds cheap tokens waiting to sell to retail. No cliff vesting, no unfair advantages. Tokens are widely dispersed from day one, not concentrated in the hands of a small group. That’s why the crypto community views Midnight as one of the most genuine fair launches in this cycle. I feel this has built real trust within the community, not just inflated by marketing or hollow promises.

But at that moment, I started to see the problem. VCs don’t just bring money. They bring networks, deal flow, access to places that an independent project would find hard to reach. I looked at other projects like Aztec or Aleo, which raised over 100 million USD from major funds. With that money, they can pay top talent in the industry, regardless of market conditions. They can build strong teams to develop ZK proof technology — a field that requires rare talent.

Midnight, on the other hand, relies on DUST fees, staking rewards from NIGHT, and capacity marketplace to generate cash flow. Theoretically, that’s enough, but that theory depends on sufficient adoption. And adoption depends on developers. I wonder if talent has enough patience to wait when cash flow is uncertain? Will the team have enough motivation during these tough times?

In terms of narrative, fair launch is a clear advantage in the crypto community. But when looking at traditional enterprises, they don’t judge blockchain projects by fair tokenomics. They look at who is behind, who is responsible. For them, VC backing isn’t about centralization; it’s about credibility. The 200 million USD from Hoskinson is a large figure, but it’s a limited resource, not a long-term commitment from a fund with a clear mandate.

I’m not saying fair launch is wrong. In core value, Midnight is doing the right thing. A truly decentralized privacy blockchain cannot start by empowering a small group of investors. But the real question is: does a philosophically correct model have enough resources to compete in a race where opponents play by different rules?

I will be closely watching over the next 18-24 months. That’s when the thawing schedule completes and the ecosystem must stand on its own. At that point, the answer will become clear: can the right philosophy pay engineers’ salaries, or is adoption the real key?