From a purely commercial and strategic perspective, Binance may have multiple reasons to keep LUNC (Terra Classic) and USTC (UST Classic) listed and operational, despite the legal context surrounding Do Kwon and Terraform Labs.
Here are the main reasons, analyzed coldly:
1. Trading volume and liquidity
· LUNC and USTC still generate significant trading volume on Binance. This translates into trading fees for the exchange.
· Many traders speculate with these assets due to their high volatility and low unit price, attracting a segment of users looking for quick profits.
· Binance earns more by maintaining pairs with liquidity than by eliminating them.
2. Loyal user base and active community
· The Terra Classic community is one of the most organized and vocal in crypto. They have conducted token burns, governance proposals, and maintain an active ecosystem.
· If Binance were to delist these tokens, it could face a strong negative reaction from this community (possible campaigns on social media, withdrawal of funds, etc.).
· Keeping them listed is a way to retain those users within the platform.
3. Strategic neutrality as a global exchange
· Binance operates in multiple jurisdictions. Unless a regulatory authority directly forces the delisting of these assets, Binance may choose to remain neutral.
· The legal case of Do Kwon does not directly imply that the tokens are illegal per se; they are decentralized assets that continue to function technically.
· Delisting them without legal obligation could set an uncomfortable precedent for other tokens with legal issues in their founding teams.
4. Potential for revaluation (no matter how remote)
· In crypto, a "revival" is never completely dismissed. The LUNC community has driven burns and minor developments.
· If there is even a 0.1% chance that the token recovers some value, Binance prefers to be in to capture that future volume, rather than lose it to other exchanges that do keep it.
5. Relationships with derivative projects and developers
· There are still projects being built on Terra Classic, and Binance can maintain business relationships with those teams.
· Delisting could close doors to potential future listing fees from projects on that chain.
6. Signal to the market
· If Binance were to delist LUNC/USTC solely because of Do Kwon's conviction, it could send a signal that each token is tied to the legal fate of its founders, something many in the crypto space reject as it goes against decentralization.
· Binance prefers to see itself as an exchange that offers opportunities to assets with community, rather than one that acts as a judge.
7. Low regulatory risk (for now)
· These tokens have not been declared illegal by most regulators. As long as there is no direct order, the risk for Binance is low.
· Moreover, Binance already has regulatory issues of its own in several jurisdictions; managing the delisting of LUNC/USTC unnecessarily could add burdens without clear benefit.
Cold commercial conclusion
For Binance, the calculation is simple: Current benefits (fees, user retention, volume) > Current risks (association with a failed project, potential marginal disrepute).
As long as the community remains active and the volume generates income, Binance has no commercial incentive to delist. If at any point the volume were to drop drastically or a clear regulatory demand arose, the equation could change, but for now, keeping them listed is the option that maximizes income and minimizes conflicts.
