Just in:
AI browsers face new credential leak warning // OneGrowth 2026: Shared AI Token Era Ahead China Telecom Global Partner Conference Held // Collapse Of TMC In Bengal Has Given A Big Opportunity For A Left Turn-Around // Foreign bank branch fined over compliance failures // Putting Scientific Research Agents Within Reach — SCNet.AI Accelerates AI4S Innovation Powered by AI & HPC // HKRITA Signs MoU with Jeanologia and Looptworks to Establish the Green Machine Circular Textile Ecosystem, Marking a Breakthrough in Scalable Textile Recycling // Security Is the New Market Access: Kigen Is Leading the IoT Security Mandate // Valve’s pricier Steam Machine tests PC ambitions // ADNOC Drilling puts AI rig to work early // Emirates SkyCargo widens Asian freight reach // Pulsar International (“Pulsar”) announces agreement as an authorized reseller of Amazon Leo to bring high-speed satellite internet to commercial maritime customers // OTC & Partners Opens 2026 with Strong Cross-Border Mandates and Strategic Expansion // Varenne Capital opens Dubai base for regional push // Global Residency by Investment: How Investors Are Choosing in 2026 // Biosphere Labs strengthens Abu Dhabi biotech hub // Europe and China Must Pivot from Tech Rivalry to “Constructive Engagement” in AI Era, Warn Leaders at CEIBS Forums // VinEnergo partners with SunAsia Energy to develop Solar-on-Water projects integrated with aquaculture in the Philippines // Paddles up! Hong Kong marks 50 Years of international dragon boat thrills // Dubai summit sets global sports agenda // Avalanche forms payments alliance with VanEck //

Binance Denies “8 % Token Take” Claim by Limitless Labs Boss

CJ Hetherington, CEO of Limitless Labs, has accused Binance of demanding 8 per cent of his project’s token supply and a multimillion-dollar deposit as conditions for listing. Binance, in a forceful rebuttal, called the allegations false and defamatory, and hinted at legal recourse.

Hetherington shared purported internal communications that outlined Binance’s demands: 1 % of the token supply for a day-one airdrop, 3 % for subsequent airdrops over six months, 1 % reserved for marketing, and another 3 % allocated to the BNB HODLer programme. He claimed Binance also asked for a $250,000 security deposit and required around $2 million in BNB as collateral. In total, he argued, these terms effectively extracted 8 % of total tokens in exchange for a listing.

Binance responded swiftly via its official X handle, stating it “does not profit” from token listings and that the content of Hetherington’s posts is “false and defamatory.” The exchange emphasised that it does not charge listing fees and that any required security deposits are typically refundable within one to two years. Binance also denied allegations of token dumping by its executives, calling them “entirely untrue and unsubstantiated.”

ADVERTISEMENT

The exchange further asserted that Hetherington’s disclosures breached confidentiality, undermining trust and transparency in industry processes. It reserved the right to pursue legal action for what it characterised as unauthorised disclosures.

The dispute has drawn responses from industry observers. Mike Dudas, founder of 6MV, stated on X that he has seen Binance listing proposals with nearly identical terms in the past month and was able to talk about them because he did not sign a nondisclosure agreement. He implied the arrangement described by Hetherington reflects a recurring model.

Crypto analyst Howard Peng, by contrast, criticised Hetherington for publicising the discussions and labelled the move immature. Peng urged projects dissatisfied with listing proposals to walk away and suggested exploring alternative exchanges.

Binance founder Changpeng “CZ” Zhao also weighed in, arguing that successful projects should attract listings without paying “fees.” He wrote that if a project must “beg an exchange to list,” it indicates weak demand and could invite scrutiny from within the community.

The exchange’s defence comes amid broader regulatory scrutiny of centralised exchanges and their listing practices. Some market participants argue that hidden costs and opaque listing criteria undermine fairness and can stifle innovation, especially for emerging projects. Others maintain that exchanges are entitled to protective mechanisms—such as collateral or token commitments—to mitigate risk and ensure project stability.

Arabian Post – Crypto News Network



Notice an issue?

Arabian Post strives to deliver the most accurate and reliable information to its readers. If you believe you have identified an error or inconsistency in this article, please don't hesitate to contact our editorial team at editor[at]thearabianpost[dot]com. We are committed to promptly addressing any concerns and ensuring the highest level of journalistic integrity.


ADVERTISEMENT
Social Media Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com