Should ETH be a store of value (SoV) asset, and should the 'forces' that do not want that be defeated?
Governance & community · 3 participants · 5 quotes · 2026-10-26 ~ 2026-10-27
lex_node argued that there are influential people inside Ethereum who actively hope ETH does not become an investment asset, that this is a coherent view, but that the ETH investment thesis must defeat them to win. The EF's Tim Beiko countered that if one values Ethereum's impact on the world, that is not a coherent view, since without mainnet everything drifts away from Ethereum, and ETH is the most important thing mainnet guarantees.
Background
Whether ETH is a 'store of value (SoV)' asset, that is, an asset that preserves purchasing power or beats inflation over the long term through its fee burn and issuance mechanisms, is a long-running debate. Some Ethereum contributors prioritize the public-good value of mainnet over turning ETH into an investment asset, and lex_node characterized them as a 'faction' blocking the ETH investment thesis. This debate unfolded in the same week as the EF funding reduction and dev tax debates.
Why it matters
Tim Beiko, who chairs the ACD calls, publicly acknowledged asset value as central to mainnet security by saying 'ETH is the most important thing mainnet actually guarantees.' This is a sign that the ETH-as-asset discourse is shedding its taboo inside the EF. It remains to be seen whether the issuance and burn policy and the funding debate both converge on the question of what ETH is an asset for.
Key points
- Is hoping that ETH does not become a store of value asset a 'coherent view' or not?
- Does ETH's asset value conflict with Ethereum's public-good influence, or do they converge on mainnet security?
- Is it appropriate to frame this as a 'faction to be defeated', or is it merely skepticism about ETH's ability to preserve purchasing power?
For — ETH should be SoV, and the opposing forces must be recognized and overcome
_gabrielShapir0
- There are influential people inside Ethereum who actively hope ETH does not become a store of value or investment asset. If you want ETH to become investable, you must understand that they are influencing things behind the scenes and that your thesis must defeat them to win.
- One may doubt whether ETH can become that, but wanting it not to beat inflation is itself incomprehensible.
Against — Rejecting asset value is not a coherent view
timbeiko.eth
- If one values Ethereum's impact on the world, including 'soft influence' such as its values, then rejecting ETH's asset value is not a coherent view.
- Without mainnet, everything else drifts away from 'Ethereum' over time, and ETH is the most important thing mainnet actually guarantees, so Ethereum's value and ETH's asset value are not separable.
Neutral — It is less opposition than skepticism about the ability to preserve purchasing power
Enzo
- I do not think people oppose ETH beating inflation. They are merely skeptical about whether ETH can reliably preserve purchasing power through volatility, shifts in demand, and different time horizons.
- This should be seen less as a matter of 'defeating a faction' and more as a matter of ETH's monetary premium emerging despite credible alternative views. If the thesis depends on winning an internal fight, that political risk should be part of the investment case.