Recently, I came across Samson Mow's comments about Ethereum, and honestly, his points are causing quite a stir in the community. Jan3's CEO has been quite direct in questioning whether ETH can truly function as money, and it's not the first time we've heard him say something like that.

What's interesting is that Samson Mow isn't just criticizing from the sidelines. Last year, he made a pretty radical decision: he liquidated his ETH holdings and put all that capital into Bitcoin. That's a bold move, right? It's not just an opinion; it's action.

One of the points Samson Mow has emphasized is the constant selling of ETH by the Ethereum Foundation. To him, that's a red flag regarding the asset's sustainability as a medium of exchange. If the foundation itself is selling, what message does that send to the market?

Samson Mow's stance reflects a trend we see in certain sectors of the ecosystem: a clear preference for Bitcoin as a store of value over alternatives. Some see it as purism, others as pragmatism. The truth is, his portfolio move was consistent with his narrative.

This kind of perspective always divides opinions. Some completely agree with Samson Mow, while others believe he's underestimating Ethereum's potential. But at least it's refreshing to see ecosystem figures backing their words with real investment decisions. That builds more credibility than just talking.