Why Telegram’s ton-only mini-apps strategy can backfire

Telegram's decision to exclusively support the MiniApp ecosystem Open Network (TON) has sparked outrage in the community.

On January 21, Telegram officially announced that it is the exclusive blockchain partner of the Ton Foundation, making Ton the only supported network for mini-apps and TonCoin (TON) in-app purchases.

The move has sparked debate in the Web3 community, with some critics saying Telegram's ton-only strategy hurts blockchain development, while others point to ton's limited liquidity and immature technology.

Table of Contents

Toggle

Tons' limited liquidity complicates native tokens.

“While the Ton-first approach was pushed quietly behind the scenes, the news of Telegram's Ton-only policy change came with surprising speed and in a heavily guarded way,” Helica Ventures director Ilya Abugov told Cointelegraph.

According to Abugov, Toon's limited liquidity complicates the ability of game developers to launch tokens on a generational basis, which has a significant impact on blockchain development.

“Centralized exchanges have shown some excitement for tons of projects,” Abugov said, noting the partial cancellation of Hamster Kombat (HMSTR) by Baybit on January 17 due to poor liquidity.

On January 15th, Hamster Kombat announced plans to build its own blockchain network, but those plans are now uncertain as Telegram's sole partnership with Ton. Cointelegraph reached out to Hamster for comment but did not receive a response by publication.

Tone stability concerns

Ton's unique presence on Telegram's Web3 ecosystem may pose challenges to the network itself.

“The network itself is still maturing, which means that complex user behavior can increase stability risks in large flows,” Abugov said.

RELATED: Telegram-linked TON blockchain to focus on US growth under Trump

Garrison Young, founder of Web3 game studio Mirai Labs, echoed Abugov's view, saying that Telegram's ton-only strategy could hamper the messenger's potential in crypto through performance issues and lost revenue opportunities.

“TON is behind Solana and Base in terms of performance, and Telegram is well positioned to collect payments for any blockchain interaction that is not built on the TON chain,” Yang said.

“Instead, they're taking a scorched-earth approach to forcing developers to use infrastructure, which will never end well.”

The 3 basic principles of the web in question?

According to IceOpen Network, Telegram's Ton-only strategy “not only goes against the fundamentals of Web3, but exposes Ton's inherently centralized nature.”

“The ton that once championed the free and open Internet is now unequivocally The Closed Network,” Ice Open Network wrote in a Jan. 22 post on X .

“This action mirrors the centralized Big Tech platform mechanisms where users are locked into an ecosystem without options. The difference is that Big Tech doesn't claim to be decentralized.”

Telegram and Ton have pledged to support freedom and decentralization. In May 2024, Telegram founder and CEO Pavel Durov said that Telegram “offers more freedom than any other platform” to app developers.

A ton-first strategy versus a ton-only strategy

“A ton-first policy would make more sense to mitigate these challenges than a ton-only policy,” says Helica Ventures' Abugov.

He also pointed out that the ton-first policy could be beneficial for those apps and Telegram by adding third-party liquidity, raising concerns about Telegram apps being funded by other blockchains. And so he said.

“Ton seems to have jumped the gun because it was so afraid of losing users to other chains. This decision will make it harder to attract liquidity from other chains while putting more pressure on the network to get better quickly.”

Cointelegraph reached out to the Telegram and Tone Foundation for comment on the community's response, but did not receive a response at the time of publication.

Magazine: BTC ‘Reasonable' $180K Target, NFTs Fall in 2024, and More: Hodler's Digest January 12 – 18