A Solana campaign displayed on a building on Shanghai’s Bund was reportedly visible for only a few minutes before being taken down. After internet users suggested that posts by Changpeng “CZ” Zhao had drawn the authorities’ attention, the Binance founder disputed the connection: according to him, the advertisement had disappeared long before he came across it on X. The episode comes as a Solana event was also postponed in the city and China’s cryptocurrency regulations remain strict.
A campaign draws attention on Shanghai’s Bund
The Solana (SOL) advertisement had been installed on a building in the Bund district, one of Shanghai’s best-known areas. Its presence quickly sparked reactions in the crypto community, as a public campaign of this scale could be interpreted as a sign that China was softening its stance toward digital assets.
That interpretation, however, was at odds with how quickly the advertisement was taken down. According to information shared by CZ, it was removed in less than ten minutes. This very short time frame contrasts with the campaign’s initial visibility and the attention it subsequently received on social media.
The advertisement did not, on its own, constitute an official announcement about regulation. But in a country where cryptocurrency-related activities are closely regulated, its display in such an iconic location could be perceived as a political or commercial signal. This ambiguity fueled online discussions.
Why CZ’s role was brought up
Shortly before the controversy gained momentum, CZ had welcomed the opening of a new Solana office in Shanghai. He described the move as an encouraging initiative that could inspire other blockchain networks and projects. His post on X circulated widely and garnered more than a million views.
Some users then argued that his comments had amplified the advertising campaign’s visibility and drawn the authorities’ attention. Their reasoning was based on the post’s extensive reach: by sharing Solana news with a much broader audience than just cryptocurrency specialists, CZ had, these critics claimed, helped put the campaign in the spotlight.
The Binance founder rejected this interpretation. In a later post, he explained that the advertisement had already been taken down by the time he heard about it. He said he came across the display on X about twelve to twenty-four hours after it had disappeared, while the photo shared online still showed the campaign in place.
This timeline is central to his response: if the advertisement was indeed taken down in less than ten minutes and CZ did not see the images until much later, his post could not have prompted the initial decision. He thus disputed the cause-and-effect link suggested by some internet users, without claiming to know the specific reasons behind the authorities’ or organizers’ actions.
A Solana event postponed amid a strict regulatory environment
Guests prevented from entering
The controversy was not limited to the display on the Bund. A Solana event scheduled to take place in Shanghai on a Friday was also postponed after guests were kept outside by staff. The available information does not establish that the advertisement’s removal and the event’s postponement were the result of a single decision, but their proximity has heightened questions about the possibility of organizing crypto-related events in mainland China.
For industry players, this situation highlights the difference between having a team or an office in a city and being authorized to hold public activities there. A blockchain company can maintain a local presence while facing restrictions on events, promotion, or services associated with digital assets.
CZ had described the opening of the Solana office as a positive example for other projects. After the advertisement was quickly taken down and the event postponed, however, he qualified his assessment, acknowledging that China had apparently not yet lifted its restrictions on cryptocurrencies.
China’s cryptocurrency regulations
Mainland China banned cryptocurrency trading in 2021 as part of a broader crackdown on financial activity. The authorities have also taken measures against various activities in the sector, including transactions and services that could facilitate speculation in digital assets.
According to information cited in the debate surrounding Solana, the regulatory crackdown expanded further in February to include the issuance of stablecoins and the tokenization of assets. These developments make any public campaign that could give the impression that the rules have changed or that the authorities now support crypto activity particularly sensitive.
The extremely brief duration of the display does not, in itself, prove which agency requested its removal or why. It does, however, illustrate the caution surrounding cryptocurrency promotion in the country. A commercial initiative can be visible for a moment, then disappear before the companies involved have time to explain its significance.
An advertisement does not mean a change in policy
The risk of interpreting a local signal as a nationwide opening
The Solana campaign led some observers to think that a change might be underway. However, an advertisement, the opening of an office, or the announcement of an event does not necessarily prove that national policy has changed. Regulatory decisions remain distinct from corporate initiatives and local efforts.
This distinction matters for investors following the prospects for blockchain adoption in China. A possible reopening of the Chinese market could have major repercussions for the global industry, but the Shanghai episode does not allow us to conclude that one is imminent. The campaign’s swift removal instead suggests that public crypto-related activities remain shrouded in uncertainty.
Some analysts believe that a Chinese policy easing could help support the next major Bitcoin bull cycle by facilitating the return of capital and users. This hypothesis remains speculative, however. The situation in Shanghai is a reminder that a reopening scenario cannot be confirmed by isolated signals without an explicit regulatory decision.
Developments in the ecosystem are not limited to regulatory questions. The technical performance and activity of networks are also closely monitored, as shown by this analysis of how Monad aims to parallelize the EVM to reach 10,000 transactions per second. These advances can attract developers and companies, but they do not replace authorization to operate in a given jurisdiction.
Solana continues to develop despite the Shanghai setback
A local presence that should still be distinguished from public activities
The advertisement’s removal is a setback for Solana’s visibility in China, but it does not necessarily mean that the project is abandoning its presence in Shanghai. CZ said the local office remained in place, while acknowledging that the regulatory situation did not amount to general authorization for crypto activities.
The Solana case highlights a common tension in the sector: teams seek to attract developers and support the adoption of their networks, while authorities may restrict public promotion or financial services based on digital assets. An office can therefore coexist with significant constraints on events and campaigns aimed at the general public.
Solana is often presented as a blockchain seeking to compete with established networks through its technical features and application ecosystem. An overview of its ambitions to challenge Ethereum and Bitcoin in the world of cryptocurrencies helps place this strategy in the context of broader competition between protocols.
This competition shifts along with the level of activity on different chains. Comparisons between networks can vary depending on the period and the metrics used, whether transaction counts, users, or applications. An article on the growth of Internet Computer compared with Solana and BNB Chain in terms of monthly activity illustrates how the relative positions of blockchains are reshaped over time.
The broader implications of blockchain visibility
Promotion, adoption, and oversight
For blockchain projects, advertisements and events are ways to showcase technology, meet developers, and grow a community. But visibility can also attract regulators’ attention, particularly when campaigns could be understood as promoting financial products or signaling a change in public policy.
Caution is not limited to commercial campaigns. Blockchain can also be used maliciously, including to conceal aspects of digital activity. The issues of oversight and security are explored in this report on a botnet that exploits blockchain to cover its tracks. Such uses help explain why authorities closely scrutinize the applications of this technology.
At the same time, institutional interest in cryptocurrencies and related products is growing in several markets. The activity of cryptoasset exchange-traded funds (ETFs), as well as its effects on flows and investor behavior, is examined in this analysis of the rise of hyperactivity in cryptoasset ETFs. These international trends do not, however, mean that China’s restrictions have been lifted.
CZ, for his part, said he supports progress across all networks, from Bitcoin and BNB to XRP and Solana. This position reflects his experience in the sector: Binance was launched in China in 2017, before changes to the rules on token sales prompted the platform to move its operations overseas.
By encouraging developers to continue their efforts to drive adoption, CZ presents local advances as useful steps for the industry, even when they remain limited. In Shanghai’s case, the key question remains the distinction between an initiative led by a blockchain project and an official change to the rules governing cryptocurrencies.
