We first came across BlockDAG Network and its $BDAG token at the end of 2024 through a YouTube video, followed by a flashy advertisement.
The advertisement featured a person in a luxury racing car on a track, discussing how he amassed his wealth through a crypto presale, before speeding off. Clicking the advertisement led to a website promoting the BlockDAG presale, including its launchpad, and left us wondering how a wealthy person in a racing car was relevant to a blockchain Layer-1 presale project.
BlockDAG Network, launched in March 2024, is a crypto project that conducted one of the longest crypto presales in recent years for the $BDAG token before the token was finally listed on exchanges in March 2026.
It was previously led by tech industry veteran and fintech expert Antony Turner until December 2025. Following the leadership changes in December 2025, Nic Van Den Bergh, previously the company’s Chief Marketing Officer (CMO), was promoted to CEO, replacing Turner and marking a significant shift in the project’s leadership structure.
The project reports raising more than $450 million to date and features a unique hybrid structure combining blockchain and Directed Acyclic Graph (DAG) technology. It claims to enhance transaction speed, increase capacity, and increase scalability by enabling thousands of transactions without compromising its decentralization.
The BlockDAG Network and its $BDAG token have sparked debate within the cryptocurrency community, with numerous investors voicing concerns over their legitimacy and some labeling it a potential scam.
In this review, we look at the project from different angles to see whether BlockDAG looks legit or a potential scam. Let's dive in.
BlockDAG Leadership Changes: Antony Turner’s Exit and Nic Van Den Bergh Promoted to CEO Role
If we’re being completely transparent, when Antony Turner was first presented as BlockDAG’s CEO, we initially thought he might be a made-up character. We didn’t find sufficient evidence to substantiate his LinkedIn profile, and his acting in keynotes seemed too theatrical. However, as we conducted further research, we found several older sources supporting his previous roles as CEO of SwissOne Capital and COO of SPIRIT Blockchain Capital, which reassured us that he’s indeed a professional who could feasibly head BlockDAG Network.
In December 2025, Antony Turner was removed from his role as CEO. BlockDAG later confirmed in an AMA session that Nic Van Den Bergh, formerly the project’s CMO, had assumed the role of CEO. No detailed explanation was given for Turner’s departure, which raised more questions in the community.
BlockDAG’s Aggressive Marketing and Paid Promotions
The BlockDAG project has employed extensive marketing through sponsored articles and press releases, accompanied by what appear to be very professional, likely costly video productions. It has also published paid advertisements and promotions on social networks such as Facebook and Instagram, as well as endorsements from crypto influencers on YouTube.
The crypto project also claims to have sponsored major European soccer teams and a famous boxer, spending millions on these partnerships. Additionally, the project has offered promotional presale bonuses, including a 50% bonus in September and a 100% bonus in November, along with various giveaways.
Altogether, this spending spree to promote the project and the $BDAG token over such a long period seems overly pushy. Why would a crypto presale project allocate substantial funds and effort to marketing at the expense of research and development?
Some claims within the BlockDAG project's marketing materials appear questionable. For example, in the June 2024 keynote, a speaker mentions endorsements from CoinTelegraph, Forbes, and Bloomberg. However, these purported endorsements seem to be nothing more than a collection of sponsored articles, with no genuine support from the digital media outlets that sponsor them.
Cryptocurrency investors want their money spent on actual product research and development. It gives a company an edge at such an early stage of its life. Excessive marketing spending, as seen with BlockDAG Network, can make people wonder whether the goal is simply to attract more buyers. This strategy could resemble a Ponzi-style scheme. Despite the scale of fundraising, the project has continued to rely heavily on marketing-driven narratives rather than verifiable technical milestones.
BlockDAG Whitepaper vs. Kaspa: Similarities Raise Concerns
We came across this issue on Reddit, where a user claimed that the BlockDAG whitepaper is too similar to Kaspa’s. Since both projects are DAG-based Layer-1 blockchain networks, we initially considered this reasonable. However, we decided to investigate, compare the two documents, and even use AI to test their authenticity.
We identified numerous similarities between the two, with the Kaspa whitepaper predating the BlockDAG whitepaper. Although the structure differs, certain sections of BlockDAG’s document closely mirror those of Kaspa’s, with similar text, concepts, and formulas; some appear to be direct screenshots of the Kaspa whitepaper.
While we cannot conclusively determine whether BlockDAG Network copied from Kaspa, and given that no blockchain partnership or collaboration has been announced between the two companies, this resemblance raises doubts about whether BlockDAG’s whitepaper is entirely original or merely repurposed.
BlockDAG Network Partnerships with Sports Teams and Celebrities
It’s unclear why a Layer-1 blockchain presale would prioritize sponsorships with sports teams and a boxer over forming partnerships with blockchain companies or other projects that could contribute to and support the development of the BlockDAG's network.
This approach reminds us of a previous presale project we reviewed, LuckyBlock, which followed a similar path by securing high-profile yet seemingly irrelevant partnerships with boxers before launching a product, raising questions about the motivation for spending millions on marketing.
As of early 2026, several of these partnerships are no longer referenced externally, and only the Seattle Orcas partnership is listed on the BlockDAG Network’s websites, suggesting the partnerships may have been used primarily to raise money.
The situation with Borussia Dortmund, however, goes far beyond misleading advertising or fundraising goals. It exposes a serious breach of trust between BlockDAG and its supposed partners, as well as a deliberate attempt to mislead the investor community.
Borussia Dortmund Sponsorship Termination and Payment Dispute
In late 2024, Borussia Dortmund confirmed to TheHolyCoins that it had officially terminated its advertising partnership with BlockDAG Network. The club explained that the contractual relationship was in the process of formalization, but it could not provide details due to ongoing legal proceedings. Despite this, BlockDAG continued to promote the club’s logo and name on its website and in marketing materials for months after termination.
The situation escalated further when, three months later, a leaked payment-demand letter from Borussia Dortmund surfaced, published by the YouTuber BinanceStuff. The document, dated September 27, 2024, alleged that DAG Systems Limited, the entity linked to BlockDAG, had defaulted on a €2,007,000 sponsorship payment. The letter directly contradicted BlockDAG’s public statement, which blamed the termination on Germany’s MiCA 2 crypto regulations.
This suggests the partnership ended because the payment was never made, further undermining the credibility of BlockDAG’s management and raising questions about the transparency of its public communications.
To date, BlockDAG has not issued any follow-up clarification addressing the payment dispute or the continued use of Borussia Dortmund’s branding after termination.
BlockDAG Presale Fundraising Strategy Raises Questions
BlockDAG’s fundraising method is unusual for a Layer-1 blockchain. Layer-1 projects mostly secure funding from venture capital or other major investors rather than through a lengthy presale. For example, Solana raised $20 million in a round led by Multicoin Capital, Avalanche secured funding from Initialized Capital and Galaxy Digital, and Algorand received backing from Union Square Ventures.
Given the previous CEO who was in charge until recently, Antony Turner’s background in crypto and traditional finance, raising funds for a legitimate Layer-1 blockchain project through conventional methods should have been within reach.
Instead, the presale continued into 2026, making it one of the longest fundraising cycles seen for a Layer-1 project before the token was eventually listed.
So, why choose the complexity of a prolonged presale? This decision raises questions, and we struggle to find any reasonable justification for it.
BlockDAG Token Valuation and FDV Inconsistencies
Another area of concern is the internal consistency of BlockDAG’s token valuation across its presale stages. While the project reports having raised more than $450 million in the presale stage, it has also set a presale price of $0.002 in the weeks leading up to the token launch, implying a fully diluted valuation (FDV) of $300 million based on the stated total token supply.
This creates a fundamental inconsistency, as the project’s implied FDV at this presale price is below the total amount of funds BlockDAG claims to have already raised. This raises questions about how the presale prices were set and how the earlier token sales fit into the project’s valuation.
Earlier in the presale, the $BDAG token was sold at significantly lower prices, including levels around $0.0015, implying an FDV of approximately $225 million. At the same time, the project also marketed higher presale price points in previous phases, including $0.016 per token, implying an FDV exceeding $2.4 billion.
BlockDAG has additionally promoted an expected listing price of $0.05, which would place the project’s FDV above $7 billion at launch. These large valuation swings, from hundreds of millions to several billions of dollars, occurred without matching changes in product maturity, network usage, or revenue.
Such sharp shifts in token pricing and implied valuation raise questions about how the presale was structured, how pricing decisions were determined, and how earlier and later participants are expected to be economically aligned.
Because of this, investors cannot clearly understand how the funds raised, token supply, and valuation fit together.
While variable pricing is not uncommon in presales, the magnitude and frequency of these valuation changes, combined with the prolonged fundraising period, create more uncertainty about the project’s economics.
In a separate January 6, 2026, meeting summary published by two investor representatives, BlockDAG leadership reportedly disclosed that only $32 million was planned for post-launch liquidity. This figure contradicts the previously referenced $100 million liquidity provision on BlockDAG’s official wiki. In the same meeting, requests for pre-launch, on-chain verification of presale funds through a multisignature wallet were reportedly declined.
BlockDAG Network Testnet Development: Explorer and Faucet Review
The BlockDAG project has introduced a blockchain explorer and faucet on its testnet, allowing users to interact with and test various platform components. However, this provides little proof that the technology actually works.
As far as we can tell, this setup could be as simple as a basic interface storing data without proper blockchain integration. That's hardly an indicator of technical development worthy of a large-scale Layer-1 blockchain project.
We’d expect something more substantial from a project that claims to have raised over $450 million, particularly given the scale of funds raised during the presale.
BlockDAG Team’s Late Introduction and Leadership Timeline
Initially, BlockDAG’s team was hidden. Only at the end of July 2024 did the project introduce its members, including Antony Turner as CEO, Jeremy Harkness as CTO, Prof. Dr. Eng. Youssef Khaoulaj as CSO, and Steven Clarke-Martin as an advisor.
While Turner began his work with BlockDAG Network in June 2023, according to his LinkedIn profile, the rest of the team joined much later—the CSO and advisor joined in May 2024, and the CTO only joined in October. This raises questions: who handled BlockDAG’s whitepaper, tokenomics, marketing, and early development before these key figures joined?
It’s hard to believe all of this was managed by one person, and we’re left wondering who was truly steering the project in its formative months.
Hidden Founder Allegations and ZachXBT’s Findings
In late October 2025, prominent blockchain investigator ZachXBT accused BlockDAG Network of concealing its real founder, Gurhan Kiziloz, who allegedly controls the project behind the scenes.
According to ZachXBT, Kiziloz, best known as the founder of the fintech startup Lanistar, which received an FCA warning in 2020 for unauthorized financial activity, is the hidden co-founder directing operations, while Antony Turner serves as the public face.
The on-chain investigator further claimed that Kiziloz moved millions in presale funds through Middle Eastern OTC brokers and that his name is actively censored in the project’s Telegram group. These revelations reignited discussions about BlockDAG’s transparency and leadership credibility, since the BlockDAG team did not address these allegations when they were first raised.
Kiziloz’s background reveals his previous involvement in short-lived cryptocurrency ventures, including Big Eyes, Dogetti, and Poorcoin, all of which collapsed shortly after their launch. Combined with the ongoing absence of verified audits, exchange listings, or transparent fund reporting, the discovery of a concealed founder with ties to controversial projects has deepened doubts about BlockDAG’s legitimacy.
The revelation also reinforced suspicions that the team structure presented to investors may be largely superficial, raising the possibility that much of the project’s leadership narrative was designed to obscure the underlying financial figures.
In December 2025, during an AMA call with BlockDAG investors, Kiziloz acknowledged his role in the project, confirming that he had funded and initiated BlockDAG before appointing Antony Turner as CEO.
According to statements Kiziloz made during the same AMA, he has since stepped back from operational involvement, positioning himself as a financial backer rather than an executive. However, as he has attended several AMAs and investor meetings, it seems his involvement with the project is deeper than claimed.
BlockDAG Roadmap Timeline Appears Unrealistic
According to the roadmap on BlockDAG’s website, development of the blockchain Layer-1 network began in January 2024, with the mainnet initially scheduled for completion by November 2024. This timeline seems overly optimistic. Completing a Layer-1 blockchain in just 11 months is unprecedented.
For comparison, BlockDAG’s "older sister," Kaspa, took eight years from inception to launch, according to their website. Research, design, planning, development, testing across multiple environments, quality assurance, and bug fixing are all crucial steps in the process. Even with an agile approach, the complex process of building a stable, scalable Layer-1 blockchain cannot realistically be completed within such a short timeframe.
As of early 2026, the mainnet has not yet launched, and the BDAG token launched on the Coinstore exchange on March 6, 2026. As initially suspected, the rapid development timeline proposed by BlockDAG Network was too implausible to accept.
Allegations From a Former BlockDAG Employee
On January 14, 2026, former BlockDAG employee Liza Van Den Berg appeared in a live discussion on the BlockDAG Investors YouTube channel, describing what she says she witnessed while working inside the company.
Liza, who relocated to BlockDAG’s Cape Town offices and worked in recruitment and operations, claims that marketing announcements and presale milestones were decided in Dubai without technical input, forcing engineers to meet public deadlines they had not approved.
She alleges that, despite being CEO, Antony Turner did not control the company’s funds and had to repeatedly request money for operations, events, and payroll. According to her, multiple employees experienced months of salary delays, and some expenses were personally covered by Turner.
During the livestream, Reid Davis stated that the presale allocation had been oversold by more than double its intended amount. Liza did not dispute this and described a later community vesting vote as occurring after the overselling could no longer be reversed.
She also claimed that internal figures for funds raised were far lower than the hundreds of millions publicly claimed, estimating amounts between $30 and $60 million. These claims differ from on-chain estimates previously shared by investigator ZachXBT.
Liza further alleged that Gurhan Kiziloz maintained effective control over finances and that community channels increasingly censored discussion of leadership and internal issues.
Our Conclusion: Is BlockDAG Legit?
In our view, BlockDAG Network presents a deeply concerning picture. While the team is now publicly identified, this transparency came only after years of opaque leadership, the concealment of the project’s actual founder, and a sudden CEO replacement in late 2025 that was not adequately explained to investors.
The confirmation that Gurhan Kiziloz was the project’s founder, following prolonged denial of his name and censorship within official channels, raises serious questions about intent and disclosure. This revelation, combined with the removal of Antony Turner as CEO, the absence of clear accountability structures, and the lack of transparent reporting on the management of hundreds of millions of dollars raised during the presale phase, makes the project harder to trust.
These concerns are not isolated. A prominent blockchain investigator has publicly challenged the project’s legitimacy, publicly labeling it a scam, while BlockDAG has offered limited, unverifiable responses rather than comprehensive disclosures. Aggressive marketing campaigns, questionable sponsorships, and shifting narratives around partnerships and development timelines further compound the issue.
While we cannot definitively label BlockDAG as a scam, the available information paints a risk profile that is difficult to ignore. The combination of hidden leadership, unexplained governance changes, missing financial transparency, and unresolved allegations raises substantially more red flags than reassurance. Based on what is publicly known at present, we believe that caution is essential.
As always, crypto investors should conduct thorough due diligence, carefully review the information provided, and avoid relying on promotional narratives when evaluating high-risk presale projects.
If you found this review helpful, explore more insights in our news section. Follow us on social media for the latest updates and to join our community discussions. Links to our social media pages are provided in the footer.
