Once a mining giant that controlled 70% of the global Bitcoin hash rate, it was ultimately brought down by internal strife.



In 2013, Wu Jihan and Zhan Ketuan decided to co-found Bitmain. Wu, who graduated from Peking University with a degree in economics, was one of the earliest advocates of Bitcoin in China and even translated Satoshi Nakamoto's white paper; Zhan, from the Institute of Microelectronics at the Chinese Academy of Sciences, had been working in integrated circuits for 15 years. One understood financial markets, the other was an expert in chip technology—this combination seemed like a match made in heaven.

And indeed, it was. Zhan led the team to develop the first-generation AntMiner S1 chip within half a year, with astonishing speed. By 2017, Bitmain had captured over 70% of the global Bitcoin mining chip market, becoming the undisputed leader in the industry. Their glory was unparalleled.

However, problems began to brew from the peak of their success. In May 2020, a farce unfolded at the Beijing Haidian District Government Service Center: over 60 burly men blocked the business license, and the two founders completely turned against each other. This scene revealed just how deep the cracks between them really were.

Looking back at Bitmain’s history, it’s less a story of a company's rise and fall and more a microcosm of the entire crypto industry. I’ve observed this field for many years, and today I want to discuss the causes and consequences of this internal conflict, as well as some underlying insights.

That seemingly perfect complementary partnership had long harbored fatal disagreements. Initially, it appeared to be a perfect match—a strategist and financier on one side, a technical R&D expert on the other, each doing their part. But the two founders’ understanding of the company's direction, decision-making authority, and long-term goals never truly aligned. This was the root of all subsequent conflicts.
View Original
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
  • Reward
  • 3
  • Repost
  • Share
Comment
0/400
GasFeeCriervip
· 3h ago
A match made in heaven can't withstand the power struggle either; the financial mind vs. the technical mind ultimately just can't play together.
View OriginalReply0
LiquidatedAgainvip
· 3h ago
A typical all-in one direction, risk control points not maintained. The borrowing rates of the two founders have long exceeded the limit. Everyone thinks they are right when making quick money, but only when the liquidation price arrives do they realize what blood loss really means. 70% of the computing power couldn't reach an agreement, in simple terms, the collateral ratio was not negotiated well, leading to forced liquidation. Once again, internal conflict led to liquidation, this operation can be considered a textbook-level failure of risk management. The partnership system is like this: initially it seems complementary, but in reality, it's two different leveraged bets, and sooner or later, one will need to add margin or face liquidation.
View OriginalReply0
IntrovertMetaversevip
· 3h ago
A match made in heaven can't escape power struggles either. This kind of tactic is really common in crypto.
View OriginalReply0
Trade Crypto Anywhere Anytime
qrCode
Scan to download Gate App
Community
English
  • 简体中文
  • English
  • Tiếng Việt
  • 繁體中文
  • Español
  • Русский
  • Français (Afrique)
  • Português (Portugal)
  • Bahasa Indonesia
  • 日本語
  • بالعربية
  • Українська
  • Português (Brasil)