A Stealth iEthereum Implementation Thesis

iEthereum, an ERC-20 token launched in 2017, has been surrounded by speculation regarding its true origins, with theories pointing towards Apple as a potential sponsor or silent partner. Given its resemblance to Apple’s branding and the timing of its launch, this theory has gained traction. However, the question remains: if Apple were indeed involved, how would they integrate iEthereum into their ecosystem while maintaining the integrity of decentralization and avoiding accusations of centralized control? This paper delves into how iEthereum's decentralized pre-mined distribution and long-standing open-market availability provide a strong foundation for avoiding centralization concerns. It also explores how Apple could incorporate iEthereum into its financial ecosystem, focusing on strategic approaches to balance both corporate oversight and decentralized values. Finally, this paper will examine iEthereum’s future role within Web3 and decentralized finance (DeFi) and how Apple might facilitate that transition.

Note: Everything discussed in this article is pure speculation and game theory. We are making no claims that iEthereum is an Apple product or has a developing wallet. For those of you that are new to the iEthereum Advocacy Trust website; iEthereum (the erc20 token) contains the Apple brand within its logo. Therefore we discuss this speculation and have fun theorizing. We are not the founders of iEthereum.

Since its launch in 2017, iEthereum has operated with a unique and simple premise: to be a decentralized digital asset, non complicated, simple, easily accessible and available to the public. The token’s structure, history, and distribution model have sparked debates, especially with the persistent theory that Apple might be the silent partner behind its creation. This theory arises from multiple factors: the similarities between the iEthereum logo and Apple’s branding, the strategic timing of its launch, and Apple’s ongoing interest in blockchain and distributed ledger, value transfer technologies.

While there is no confirmed link between Apple and iEthereum, the possibility raises an important question: if Apple were to reveal itself as connected to iEthereum, how would it manage the inherent contradictions between its traditional centralized corporate structure and iEthereum’s decentralized ethos? Furthermore, how could Apple use iEthereum within its own ecosystem, such as Apple Pay, without diluting the principles of decentralization? This paper will explore how iEthereum’s structure may offer Apple an opportunity to bridge these two worlds.

One of the most significant concerns in the cryptocurrency space is the concept of pre-mining, where a large portion of a token’s supply is mined and distributed before public access. This practice has led to accusations of unfair distribution and centralization, as it often results in a few parties controlling a significant portion of the supply. However, iEthereum’s situation is unique. While the token was pre-mined, 99% of its total supply was distributed to the public, reducing the influence that the original creators or early adopters might have had over the token’s price or governance.

The fact that iEthereum has been available on the open market since 2017 bolsters its decentralized credentials. Unlike projects that selectively distribute tokens to private investors or keep significant reserves for founders, iEthereum has been widely distributed to the public. This means that, even if a large entity like Apple were behind the token’s creation, they no longer have significant control over it. The token’s value and usage are determined by market dynamics, not by corporate control.

This extended period of open-market trading strengthens the argument that iEthereum is decentralized in practice, even if it had centralized origins. Over time, the distribution of tokens across a diverse group of holders would make it impossible for any single entity to exert unilateral control over the token. In this way, iEthereum has effectively shielded itself from many of the criticisms typically leveled at pre-mined tokens.

If Apple were involved with iEthereum, the company could emphasize the decentralized nature of the project, pointing to the wide distribution of tokens as evidence that they do not control the token’s future. Rather than presenting iEthereum as a proprietary Apple product, the company could position itself as a facilitator or supporter of decentralized technologies. This approach would help Apple avoid accusations of centralization, which could harm its reputation in the Web3 space.

Apple could also highlight its role as a technology enabler rather than a central authority. For instance, the company could integrate iEthereum into its financial products (such as Apple Pay) without assuming control over the token’s governance or supply. By doing so, Apple would maintain its image as a company that champions user privacy and decentralization, while also benefiting from the efficiencies and innovations of blockchain technology.