Monad vs. Hayes: A Clash Between Technology Vision and Token Economics

Event Background

(Source: Cointelegraph)

Monad founder Keone Hon responded after seeing Arthur Hayes repeatedly comment on the chain. He acknowledged Hayes’ major contributions to the perpetual contracts space and noted that public discussion around Monad may include misunderstandings. He wanted to clarify the main points and explain how Monad differs from other Layer 1s.

Keone also noted that BitMEX faced heavy skepticism during its growth phase. He chose to respond directly and keep building.

Keone: Monad’s Technical Positioning and Core Features

Keone summarized Monad’s characteristics into several key points to show that its technical path is not just another standard Layer 1. Key features include:

• Ultra-fast transfers: Funds sent from Coinbase settle in 1–2 seconds.
• High-speed decentralized network built on an entirely new tech stack: 170 validators are already live worldwide, with more being added.
• Challenging the “high performance equals centralization” narrative: Emphasizes that both enterprises and developers still value decentralization and credible neutrality.
• Fully open-source, with proprietary codebases in C++ and Rust, optimized for performance suitable for high-frequency trading.
• MonadBFT consensus mechanism: Resolves tail fork issues in pipelined consensus and reduces MEV risk.
• Asynchronous execution architecture: Decouples consensus from execution to boost efficiency—a direction Ethereum is also pursuing.
• Innovative components: Includes a JIT compiler, MonadDB, RaptorCast propagation, and parallel execution.
• Emerging ecosystem: Still in its early stages, but new teams are already building applications on Monad.
• Ongoing research: Continued exploration of gas pricing, privacy, and asynchronous execution.
• MON’s public sale favors retail participants: Designed to prevent large-scale acquisition by major investors.

Keone even offered to send Hayes some MON directly, inviting him to experience the network firsthand.

Hayes’ Perspective: Focusing on Tokenomics and Capital Flows, Not Technology

Hayes’ response was entirely market-driven. He admitted he doesn’t understand Monad’s technology and doesn’t plan to study it, though he acknowledged the Monad team’s technical expertise. Still, he argued that the token structure faces severe pressure. He questioned MON’s limited circulating supply, significant unlock pressure, and the challenge of absorbing inflation and post-unlock selling.

His main point was clear: “Give me an analysis of capital flows, not technical details.” In Hayes’ view, MON is “fit for short-term trading but cannot withstand long-term supply and demand imbalance.”

Keone’s Rebuttal: Data Inaccuracies and Design Differences

Keone identified inaccuracies in Hayes’ claims and clarified the following:

• Inflation is 2% annually, not 1% monthly.
• Locked tokens cannot be staked, mitigating dilution caused by nodes with high staking weight.
• Coinbase’s public sale prioritizes retail orders, preventing large players from dominating.
• The tech stack is entirely self-developed to push the boundaries of decentralized performance.

He asked whether Hayes had any criticisms specific to Monad’s features, but Hayes avoided technical issues and instead challenged: “If you’re truly different from other chains, unlock all tokens now and let the market price them.” Keone countered that this demand was unreasonable and questioned why Hayes only applies this standard to Monad, not to projects in his own portfolio.

Community Response: Even More Doubts Raised About Hayes

This exchange quickly sparked intense debate in the community, with many pushing back on Hayes’ position:

• Some noted that Hayes’ previous MON price predictions contradict his current criticisms.
• Others argued that Hayes doesn’t hold his own investments to the same standard.
• Certain KOLs suggested he was simply sowing fear to buy at lower prices.

From a broader perspective, many saw this as a classic clash between trader and developer mindsets:

• Traders focus on price, circulating supply, and supply-demand dynamics.
• Developers care about technology, architecture, and long-term value.

This difference in perspective means the discussion will never align on a single level.

To learn more about Web3, register at: https://www.gate.com/

Summary

This conflict fundamentally stems from Keone and Hayes operating within different frameworks: one prioritizes technological breakthroughs and long-term development, the other is focused on token supply-demand and market structure. Technical narratives require time to prove out, while trading logic can spark immediate emotional reactions. The two perspectives cannot be reconciled in the short term. As a result, this debate is destined to remain unresolved. Monad’s future ultimately depends on whether developers choose to build on it and if its technology can demonstrate real value in the coming years. It is not determined by a single social media exchange.