ivangbi 🦞@ivangbi_
Some personal thoughts on the Gnosis discussion 💭
Note: I've no skin in the game on either side. I've always found the RFV / NAV discussions in DAOs interesting, and this is one of the oldest, successful, product-shipping & richest ones out there. I probably lack some nuance here, but I've read enough opinions to throw in one more into the mix 😶🌫️
Let's not forget that they shipped some amazing products over the years, supported builders and hackathons, and so on. The value created has been incredible (aka @safe and @CoWSwap to name some). The value capture though is another story, and everyone's aware of that.
1. If GNO isn't officially advertized as having assets backing (RFV) or having a bottom price line protected by the assets - then moral claims to treasury can't be assumed. If it isn't advertized as a hedge fund, then it isn't one. Holders could in theory bring up these discussions (which they did), but that's not a moral dilemma then - it's just a voting / financial outcome.
2. I remember buybacks happened in the past though which could in theory suggest that the backing theory existed, but that's again more of a legal rather than a moral discussion. Having a high enough price helps with M&As, incentives, team bonuses if any, etc. Everyone knows that high FDV is better to have when you start doing things "in kind", because then your present cash spending could be reduced as a result. Thus, it's obviously a good thing to not have the price go low even if no immediate $$-interests are at stake.
- As a holder, the choice seems pretty simple: continue believing that the value capture will eventually happen and thus you'll make $ from the products created. Or don't believe it and see your investment fall in price eventually (which then means you should just sell). And if it's an investment, that's exactly how it works - not a hedge fund after all.
- As an outsider, I can't call Gnosis DAO anything but value-producing for the ecosystem. So as an outsider I see it as either "let people take the RFV and arb some premium as a result - and have a value-producing DAO die" or "let them try again and again and see if it works out". That sounds like venture to me.
The one thing I don't have an opinion/answer to is "random buybacks" (aka the plunge protection would occur but at random times). In theory, one could say there is no backing, but when the price would fall - arbitrage this difference? But then you assume foul play from the founding team, and with such theories, it might be better for you not to hold in the first place - since nothing good comes when such assumptions are made. As for the pet projects, as the biggest holders they could potentially push what they believe in (for whatever reason) and either you think they are right - or you think they're wrong and sell. But end of the day, there is nothing immoral here. It's just a choice of "are you in for the ride or you've had enough".
3. Whether this venture is good and whether the spending budgets requested are justified - that's another topic. Holders could in theory vote against those things. If you are a majority holder, you can do either that, or RFV, or something else. We've seen the @aave DAO recently also go through tough but important discussions. And to people saying the treasury is financially mismanaged: well, try building products, navigating bear markets, hiring, staying relevant AND managing a treasury like a hedge fund. Let's see you execute all these things perfectly.
5. I am all for token holder protections, value being inside tokens, and all that - I am not against tokenizing value onchain at all. But scapegoating people who are much further on the "good" spectrum isn't the way to get there. M&As where token holders get rekt fully (aka @HoudiniSwap being the recent case) is where investor protections should be. But trying & building & genuinely shipping good stuff (with questionable value capture in some cases) isn't foul play in my opinion, these are just cases which require solving value capture, not closing. That's venture.
Imho.
