have not seen many opinions worse than this in crypto a foundation building user facing products has the following consequences: i) if you are a team also building the same product a foundation is, then you have 0 incentive to remain on that chain because - you either outcompete them, in which case since the foundation owns the majority of tokens, they get more resources to compete with you - you arent able to compete in a free market because foundations by merely existing act as the "official" version of something, regardless of if the product is objectively better - even if the foundation product is not making a profit, they still undercut your demand and margins (this is not hypothetical, this happens in nations with nationalized sectors all the time) - and btw if a team is not making profit, then they also are not gonna get better at making the product ii) by virtue of the above, you then disincentivize new teams coming to build on the chain because why would they bother with such a handicap. so now you have disincentivized free market competition iii) this of course means that over time a single entity is the singular point of failure for several things on the chain, in which case there's no purpose to a blockchain. this team also has a very skewed feedback loop since it's not clear if they actually made a better product or they're just the official channel (see the DMV) iv) hence the means of production are controlled by the state v) congratulations you have reinvented communism and your chain is now dead the actual way this must work is the foundation sharing their information with the private teams to help them improve the gaps on the chain since they have more information by being perceived as the official channel