- Binance CEO denies owning CommEx, but not all are convinced.
- CZ Admits Ex-Binance personnel may move to CommEx.
- Similar design and API between Binance and CommEx fueling suspicions.
As soon as Binance announced leaving Russia and selling its assets to CommEx, questions began to arise. Where did this no-name exchange come from, and how did it get funding? Questions quickly led to speculation that Binance, or perhaps even its CEO Changpeng “CZ” Zhao, is behind the new exchange. Moreover, CZ’s recent denials open more questions than answers.
CZ Denies Owning CommEx, But Questions Remain
In the swirling sea of speculation surrounding Binance’s alleged exit from Russia, the spotlight has veered towards its potential ties with the newly surfaced CommEx. Binance’s CEO, Changpeng Zhao (CZ), took to Twitter to dispel rumors of his ownership in CommEx. Yet, the waters remain murky as various aspects of this unfolding narrative beg a deeper examination.
For one, CZ confirmed that certain ex-Binance personnel may have moved to CommEx. The exact reasons behind this movement remain undisclosed, fueling curiosity and skepticism within the crypto community.
Sponsored
Adding fuel to the fire, the unmistakable similarities in design and API between Binance and CommEx have raised eyebrows. CZ addressed this by stating that such similarities were intentional to ensure a smooth user experience. However, this answer raises the obvious question of Binance’s power over the new exchange, enabling it to dictate its user interface.
One of the people unconvinced by Binance’s story was Adam Cochran, a notable figure in the crypto space. He accused CommEx of being a shell company operated by Binance to continue profiting from Russian oligarchs.
“this no named, new domain exchange, that claims to be backed by leading VCs but lists none, on its first day of operations, buys Binance’s Russia assets, happens to run on Binance Cloud (which is no longer offered) & means trades just settle against Binance liquidity,” Cochran said about CommEx.
Speculations like these have made social media users joke that the new CommEX CEO is just CZ in disguise.
Is CommEx another BinanceUS, WaziX? How Binance Controls its Foreign Entities
Binance’s operational model abroad has been scrutinized for purportedly setting up shell companies to sidestep stringent regulatory requirements. This model, critics argue, allows Binance to continue its operations in regions where direct operations might face legal hurdles.
A case in point is Binance’s quick disassociation from WazirX, an Indian cryptocurrency exchange, amidst the tightening regulatory environment in India. Despite initial affiliations, Binance swiftly distanced itself when regulatory heat intensified, raising questions about the nature and depth of its relationships with foreign entities.
Similarly, the narrative around BinanceUS showcases a similar pattern. While Binance has claimed to license its software to BinanceUS, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) disagrees. The agency claims Binance had complete control over its U.S. counterpart, prompting a lawsuit against the exchange.
The emerging story of CommEx now falls into this broader narrative. The alleged ties to Binance now lead to conjectures of it being another foreign entity under Binance’s covert control.
On the Flipside
- Before the CommEx deal, Binance attempted to navigate compliance amid increasingly severe sanctions on Russia amid its invasion of Ukraine.
- Binance faced regulatory issues in several countries, including outright bans in the UK and Italy. The exchange also received warnings from regulators in Japan, Canada, and Thailand.
Why This Matters
If substantiated, Binance’s connection with CommEx will severely impact the biggest crypto exchange in the world.
Read more about Binance’s relationship with CommEx:
Binance Russia Exit Questioned Over Unclear CommEX Origins
Read more about Binance’s troubles in Europe:
Binance Europe in Trouble: Should Users Consider Jumping Ship?
