CZ Memoir Sparks Fresh War With OKX Founder Star Xu

In a move to discredit Zhao’s account, Xu has revived a 2015 rebuttal that OKCoin originally published during their initial falling out. To substantiate his claims, Xu has pointed to a notarized video of a chat session, which he asserts provides definitive proof that the narrative being peddled in the memoir is factually inaccurate. By re-releasing these documents, Xu is effectively attempting to frame the memoir not as historical record, but as a calculated attempt to rewrite industry history.

Why This Matters for the Market

For investors and traders, this public spat is more than just a clash of egos between two industry titans. It serves as a reminder of the historical volatility and lack of institutional maturity that characterized the early days of crypto exchanges. When founders of major legacy exchanges engage in public mudslinging, it forces market participants to reconsider the stability and transparency of the platforms they rely upon.

The 2020 withdrawal freeze at OKEx remains a sensitive point for long-term users, and by bringing it back into the conversation, Zhao has inadvertently reminded the market of the risks associated with centralized exchanges. For traders, this highlights the ongoing importance of counterparty risk assessment, regardless of how large or established an exchange may appear to be.

Looking Ahead: The Battle for Narrative

As the industry continues to push for regulatory legitimacy and institutional adoption, the “war of the memoirs” creates a distraction that neither Binance nor OKX likely welcomes. While the technical infrastructure of these exchanges has evolved significantly since 2015, the underlying animosity between their leadership remains a constant variable.

Market observers should watch for how these accusations impact the respective brand reputations of both platforms. While the dispute is primarily retrospective, it underscores the fragility of the relationships between top-tier exchange operators. Investors should remain focused on the current operational transparency and security protocols of these platforms, rather than the historical grievances of their founders, as the industry moves toward a more digitized and regulated future.