Japan's financial group SBI Holdings has joined a Solana blockchain-based stablecoin and real-world asset (RWA) alliance, fuelling a dispute over responsibility within the Cardano community. As criticism grows that a symbolic partner in Japan has been lost to a rival ecosystem, Cardano founder Charles Hoskinson said business development should be the responsibility of the community, not a specific individual.

On July 13, blockchain media outlet U.Today reported that ADA holders publicly criticised the Cardano Foundation, developer Input Output Global (IOG) and Hoskinson's business development strategy after SBI Holdings joined the Solana ecosystem.

The backlash has grown as it intersects with Cardano's early history. Cardano is known as a project that raised a significant portion of its early funding from Japanese investors. For that reason, the community is treating the decision by a leading Japanese financial company to choose a competing chain not as a simple business partnership but as a symbolic defeat for Cardano. Criticism has continued that a project that has stressed strong ties to Asian markets failed to maintain influence in a key region.

As the controversy grew, some users on X, formerly known as Twitter, directly held Hoskinson responsible. Hoskinson countered that it is a misconception to place business development responsibility on an individual. He described the community's stance as "learned helplessness" and argued that the era in which a specific organisation ran a project in a centralised way is already over.

Hoskinson stressed that commercial negotiating authority for Cardano is not held exclusively by him or IOG. To pursue major business or strategic partnerships, he said, the community must use the Treasury, a shared pool of funds operated through on-chain governance, with the community directly approving budgets and driving initiatives. "If you want a big contract like SBI, you should not demand that someone solve it on social media, but directly fund commercial initiatives," he said.

Hoskinson also pushed back against claims that he should personally step in, saying those making that argument must first show whether he has legal and institutional authority. "Who has official authority and funds? Show the relevant vote or contract," he said. "You cannot arbitrarily dump this responsibility on a specific individual."

The dispute has also brought renewed attention to differences in governance structures between Cardano and Solana. Solana moves quickly on corporate partnerships and ecosystem expansion through a relatively centralised foundation-led structure, while Cardano relies on on-chain voting procedures for most business efforts and spending. That has led to criticism that the two differ in decision-making speed and ability to execute even when securing major business opportunities.

Some critics also say that in a situation of declining liquidity and difficulty securing corporate partnerships, Hoskinson's remarks could be seen as trying to distance himself from practical problems. Hoskinson, however, again stressed the principle of decentralisation. He argued that Cardano's commercial success is a task that all token holders must build together, not a single leader.

Industry observers see the dispute as going beyond a simple community conflict and becoming a broader challenge to Cardano's overall business development system. They say similar controversies could recur if roles and responsibilities are not clarified over who will pursue major strategic partnerships, how funds will be raised, and what procedures will be used for approval.