A public rift has emerged between Ryan Sean Adams and David Hoffman, co-founders of crypto media outlet Bankless, over the intrinsic link between the Ethereum network and the ETH token. The debate centers on a growing notion in the industry: “Ethereum can exist without the necessity of ETH.”
Adams sees ETH as essential to Ethereum’s strength
Taking to X, Adams issued a pointed critique of those who applaud Ethereum’s technology yet dismiss the need for the ETH token. He argued that for Ethereum to establish a robust economic foundation, ETH must gain recognition worldwide as a store of value. Without this, Adams warns, the network’s core premise will be undermined.
Bankless has made its name producing content on decentralized finance and the Ethereum ecosystem. Adams insists this debate isn’t just theoretical: he sees ETH’s success as directly tied to Ethereum’s future.
“There is no strong Ethereum without ETH valued in the trillions of dollars. If ETH does not become a global store of value, Ethereum will be a failed project,” stated Adams.
He went on to say that ETH is fundamental to decentralized finance, serving as a key economic driver and the principal asset underpinning property rights on the network. Adams asserted that separating the network from its native asset reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of Ethereum’s economic structure.
Mini glossary: A store of value protects purchasing power over time, while a unit of account is the measure used to express prices and economic value.
Hoffman counters with a call for clear mechanisms
David Hoffman publicly disagreed with Adams’ analogy, arguing that the Ethereum network and the ETH token must be assessed in different contexts. This distinction, he believes, means it is inaccurate to regard them as inseparable. Yet, Hoffman also agreed that ETH needs a clear and robust value accrual mechanism.
In Hoffman’s view, the analogy does not stand: the Ethereum network and ETH should be considered as two distinct tools for different purposes, but ETH must have an effective way to absorb value for the system to thrive.
Adams countered that the mechanism for ETH’s value accrual is already evident. He pointed to ETH’s role as money, a medium of exchange, and its long-discussed function as a unit of account. Adams maintains that framing this model as a new idea overlooks years of debate within the Ethereum community.
Disagreement fueled by major ETH sell-off
This split gained more attention following Hoffman’s announcement that he had sold the remainder of his ETH holdings between mid and late May 2026. His move prompted significant reaction from the crypto community and spotlighted divergent perspectives within Bankless’s leadership.
On the other hand, Adams has not disclosed any similar sales of his Ethereum holdings, even though he has stepped back from some roles at Bankless. These developments highlight not only their differing market positions, but also their fundamental disagreements over the economic principles underpinning Ethereum.
