Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong Responds to Base App Backlash

Hish Calls Out the Base Pivot

Hish, a former Coinbase employee who worked on Coinbase Wallet, posted that he was deeply concerned as a $COIN shareholder. He said the Base App had been pitched internally as the “mother of all superapps.” However, he argued that leadership pushed social and experimental features that users did not want.

According to Hish, users consistently asked for a world-class wallet. Instead, they got social feeds, creator coins, and integrations with external projects. He specifically criticized:

• The Farcaster integration, whose founders later built or aligned with competing infrastructure.
• The Zora creator coin experiment, whose team eventually shifted attention toward another chain.

He suggested Coinbase should fire those responsible for the pivot and refocus on its core product.

Brian Armstrong Takes Ownership

Brian Armstrong responded directly and publicly. Instead of deflecting, he said, “I’ll take ownership of that if you want to fire someone.”

He explained that the criticized direction was already “in the rearview mirror.” According to Armstrong, Base had pivoted weeks earlier. The new direction focuses on becoming a self-custodial version of Coinbase centered on trading.

He emphasized that:

• A self-custody wallet is critical as activity moves onchain.
• Most resources still support the core retail Coinbase app.
• The main app is also becoming increasingly onchain over time.

Armstrong also invited Hish to return to Coinbase, acknowledging that he and his team built a strong foundation with Coinbase Wallet. Hish responded positively and said he was seriously considering it.

The tone remained constructive, but the exchange amplified broader ecosystem frustration.

Farcaster Integration: Ambition Meets Execution Problems

Base integrated Farcaster into the super app vision to blend social networking with onchain activity. The idea was simple: merge wallet functionality with a decentralized social feed and tap into Coinbase’s user base.

In theory, this could have driven engagement and onchain growth.

In practice, several problems emerged.

First, the user experience suffered. Critics described the Base App as an “imperfect Farcaster client.” The wallet became cluttered. Social feeds interfered with trading workflows. Users who primarily wanted swaps and asset management found the app confusing.

Second, execution lagged. Standalone alternatives like Rainbow and Warpcast delivered cleaner experiences. As a result, power users migrated back to native tools.

Third, ecosystem tensions increased. Some builders felt Base tried to launch a Warpcast competitor rather than strengthen partnerships. By early 2026, Base removed the Farcaster social feed entirely and refocused on trading.

The retreat signaled that the social bet did not deliver sustainable engagement.

Zora Creator Coins: Hype Without Retention

At the same time, Base leaned heavily into Zora’s creator coin experiment. The vision revolved around “coin everything.” Users could mint tokens tied to creators, posts, or ideas. Coinbase invested early in Zora and promoted the initiative as a major SocialFi push.

Initially, it generated excitement. Token mints surged. Some creator coins briefly reached multi-million-dollar valuations.

However, sustainability quickly became the issue.

Several creator tokens pumped rapidly and then crashed. One prominent example saw a token hit a $9 million fully diluted valuation before dropping more than 60% within hours. Critics argued that many coins lacked real utility. Volatility replaced community building.

Builders also complained about favoritism. Some said Base heavily promoted Zora while underfunding core infrastructure such as explorers and indexers. Others pointed to high slippage, gas issues, and poor UX as additional friction.

Eventually, Base ended certain creator reward programs and shifted attention back to trading. Meanwhile, Zora began expanding toward other ecosystems, including deeper integration with Solana.

The result was reputational damage. Many users saw the push as short-term hype rather than long-term ecosystem building.

Broader Builder Frustration

The Hish thread triggered a wave of replies from other ecosystem participants.

Common themes included:

• Calls for stronger builder support.
• Complaints about memecoin focus over serious infrastructure.
• Criticism of underfunded Base-native projects.
• Demands for accountability at the leadership level.

Some questioned major acquisitions while smaller builders struggled for grants. Others argued that Base had the technical potential to rival Solana but lacked disciplined execution.

Notably, Brian Armstrong has publicly stated that Base will evolve into a fully integrated super app. However, the recent pivot suggests that Coinbase now prioritizes trading and wallet fundamentals before layering social experiments.

Strategic Reset for Base

The controversy ultimately highlights a deeper tension.

On one side, Coinbase wants to innovate aggressively. It wants to experiment with social, creator economies, and new token models. On the other side, users consistently demand reliability, trading performance, and clean UX.

The recent pivot indicates that Coinbase is recalibrating. Armstrong’s public ownership of the issue signals that leadership recognizes execution gaps. Meanwhile, the invitation for former builders to return suggests a renewed focus on fundamentals.

Going forward, Base appears to be shifting from social-first experimentation to trading-first infrastructure. Whether that reset restores builder confidence and ecosystem momentum will depend less on vision and more on disciplined delivery.

What To Watch Next

It will be interesting to see how the Base super app shifts in the coming weeks and months.

Brian Armstrong promised a more resources to be allocated to the retail side of the app and in self custody.

It will also be worthwhile to see how the social angle works on the super app.