- Kang slams Lee’s Ethereum forecast as financially misguided and flawed.
- Mechanism Capital’s Andrew Kang challenges Lee’s Ethereum price predictions boldly.
- Lee’s “digital oil” comparison to Ethereum dismissed by Kang’s critique.
Andrew Kang, co-founder of Mechanism Capital, has ignited a heated debate in the crypto community by sharply criticizing Tom Lee, the founder of Fundstrat, for his overly optimistic projections on Ethereum.
Lee recently made the bold claim at the Korea Blockchain Week 2025 that Bitcoin would rocket to $200,000-$250,000 by year-end and that Ethereum would go to even higher heights of $10,000-$12,000, with a potential of even higher highs of up to $15,000 if macro conditions are good.
In an even more critical review posted on X, Kang criticized Lee, referring to his opinions as financially illiterate and among the most retarded arguments he has ever encountered in a high-profile analyst. He levelled charges that Lee was offering unprecedented levels of exit liquidity to crypto investors and even to such organizations as the Ethereum Foundation.
Kang applied the situation with Lee to the events surrounding the collapse of the Celsius network in 2021-2022 and made a comparison between the two.
Also Read: SEC and FINRA Investigate Suspicious Stock Trades Before Crypto Announcements!
Kang’s Critique: Ethereum’s Flat Fee Revenue and a Misleading Analogy
Lee’s bullish prediction rests on the idea that Ethereum’s network fees will skyrocket as stablecoins and tokenized real-world assets (RWAs) drive demand. Furthermore, he compared Ethereum to digital oil because he thought that the growth trends would be the same.
Kang was quick to disregard this analogy by stating that, when compared to inflation, oil prices have not changed much over a hundred years.
According to Kang, Ethereum fee income has not increased since 2020 despite the large increase in the volume of stablecoins and RWA. This, in his opinion, can be explained by the upgrades of the networks, the shift of the activity to other competitive blockchains, and the low volumes of transactions of most tokenized assets themselves.
According to Kang, even the largest banks did not buy Ethereum on their balance sheets, which once again invalidates Lee’s optimistic expectations.
Lee’s speculation that Ethereum could someday be worth more than all financial infrastructure firms combined was also criticized by Kang. He labeled it as “delusion” and a “fundamental misunderstanding of value accrual.”
Although Kang did not reject the use of technical analysis to explain the trend in Ethereum’s price, he was critical of how Lee selectively used these tools. According to Kang, Ethereum’s chart has been locked in a multi-year range, similar to crude oil, and the recent failures to break through resistance levels suggest bearish momentum.
Also Read: Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse Hails XRP Community’s Global Impact at XRP Seoul 2025 Event
