2026-01-07 03:54:58

Funkari's Neks recently exposed a frustrating incident—before announcing the cancellation of the 2026 event, NFT Paris, a Web3 conference, had already received over 500,000 euros in sponsorship fees from sponsors and then refused to refund.

How was this handled? Several sponsors posted the emails they received, where NFT Paris used the excuse "According to the contract terms, the related expenses have already exceeded the sponsorship fee" to refuse refunds. The wording was quite firm, implying: the money has already been spent, and there's nothing they can do.

The sponsors were also a bit confused. Their sponsorship fees ranged from 5,000 euros to 30,000 euros. They initially thought they were supporting an influential industry conference, but the event was canceled, and their money went down the drain. Even more upsetting, the information NFT Paris released about the 2026 event has become ambiguous.

This incident reflects some current issues in the Web3 industry—easy fundraising, difficult operations, and credibility challenges. For sponsors, this is a warning: before participating in Web3 projects and events, the contract details must be carefully reviewed. Especially for large sponsorships, the risk clauses need to be clearly understood. Frankly, in this circle, the spirit of contracts and transparency still need to be strengthened.

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

10 Likes

Reward
10
8
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

Anon32942

· 01-10 02:36

Another classic move in the Web3 circle: 500,000 euros gone just like that. How outrageous is this contract?

View OriginalReply0

LightningLady

· 01-09 06:33

It's the same old story, playing word games with contract terms. Anyway, the sponsors are just the big fools.

View OriginalReply0

NFTRegretter

· 01-09 03:13

It's the same old story. Contract terms are basically just ways to shift responsibility, to put it plainly.

View OriginalReply0

MemeTokenGenius

· 01-07 04:25

Damn, 500,000 euros just swallowed up? This contract is really ruthless This is the current state of Web3, full of all kinds of tricks Ugh, another lesson learned the hard way, gotta remember this The NFT scene is really deep waters, anyone who gets involved will regret it Someone should have properly regulated these pitfalls long ago Is this what you call "I spent money, so it's justified"? Brilliant logic Really treating sponsors as fools, outrageous Is the contract the boss? How can everything be brushed off with just a clause Web3 reputation, it really needs to be cleaned up 500,000 euros, that's no small amount, just evaporated Where's the promised transparency? It all turned into a confusing mess

View OriginalReply0

MondayYoloFridayCry

· 01-07 04:14

Once again, the same old story—the loopholes in the contract terms are big enough to drive a tank. --- 50,000 euros is gone just like that, really playing hard. --- Why does it feel like the Web3 circle now just uses "contract terms" to cover up the truth? --- These people are so sweet-talking during fundraising, but when something goes wrong, they hide behind the contract. Classic. --- Sponsors are also a bit naive—taking money into Web3 without consulting a lawyer? --- NFT Paris's move was brilliant—taking the money first and then changing the tune, a perfect textbook case. --- Honestly, participating in these kinds of events now feels like signing a slavery contract—must double-check repeatedly, or it's just giving away free.

View OriginalReply0

LiquidationOracle

· 01-07 04:13

Another classic Web3 scam, 500,000 euros just gone --- NFT Paris's move is really brilliant; canceling the event and then blaming contract terms. I just want to ask, what do you call this credibility? --- Where's the promised transparency? This circle is like this—raising money so fast that it’s deadly, and disappearing even faster when problems arise --- The sponsor lost big this time, from 5,000 euros to 30,000 euros just went down the drain. Next time, remember not to touch these kinds of conferences --- No matter how harsh the contract is written, it can't change one fact—this is a rug pull, just disguised as a conference --- I said it before, it seems NFT Paris was quietly digesting sponsorship fees all along --- Web3 is even less transparent than CeFi; at least banks are regulated. These conference organizers just rely on contract clauses to turn hostile --- Contractual spirit? Here? Wake up --- Multiple sponsors got hurt. This matter should be exposed thoroughly so that future participants remember --- You’ve already spent the money, and there's nothing you can do. This sounds tough, but they just don’t want to give refunds

View OriginalReply0

PseudoIntellectual

· 01-07 04:11

Here we go again? This circle is really hopeless; contracts can be casually shifted onto others.

View OriginalReply0

CafeMinor

· 01-07 04:09

It's the same old trick, a scene of信用破产 in the Web3 circle. --- NFT Paris's move is really ruthless, directly treating sponsors as cash cows. --- 50,000 euros just gone like that? Contract terms really need to be read thoroughly. --- This is what Web3 looks like now; it's easy to make promises but hard to deliver. --- So, in this circle, you must think twice before signing. --- Refusing refunds and still being so confident—amazing. --- A lesson learned from giving away 50,000 euros for free; who told you not to check the contract? --- Typical fundraising by making promises, running away through contract loopholes. --- Sponsors really lost big this time; next time they'll remember. --- Web3's reputation still needs to be further repaired.

View OriginalReply0