# LayerZero Foundation acquisition of Stargate (STG)

**URL:** <https://stargate.discourse.group/t/layerzero-foundation-acquisition-of-stargate-stg/682>\
**Category:** General\
**Created:** [August 10, 2025, 4:22pm UTC](https://stargate.discourse.group/t/layerzero-foundation-acquisition-of-stargate-stg/682 "2025-08-10T16:22:24Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 5

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![priyeshu](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex003/user_avatar/stargate.discourse.group/priyeshu/32/154_2.png) [@priyeshu](https://stargate.discourse.group/u/priyeshu)\
**Post date:** [August 10, 2025, 6:03pm UTC](https://stargate.discourse.group/t/layerzero-foundation-acquisition-of-stargate-stg/682/5 "2025-08-10T18:03:27Z")

</div>

This seems like a well-thought-out proposal and looks like a step in the right direction. My theory is that bridges in themselves are almost no revenue-making machines, as the competitive landscape has evolved and a bridge having an independent token does more harm than good. For a bridge to be a well oiled machinery it should be supported and funded by a bigger entity that can be a cross-chain message protocol or a Layer-1 which wants to bring better liquidity and users to their ecosystem.

With the dissolution of STG token – I beleive the team would be able to lock-in and focus on what really matters. Managing two tokens is a pain and causes more distractions than necessarry.

I fully support the proposal and I beleive the STG holders will capture more upside in ZRO than they could potentially capture in STG because of the infirmness of the bridge as a business model.

---

_[View the full topic](https://stargate.discourse.group/t/layerzero-foundation-acquisition-of-stargate-stg/682)._