GIP-100: Should Gnosis DAO conduct a large-scale buyback program?

Governance GIPs
42

@Karpatkey tagging you here in response to @gno-investor 's question

43

Unfortunately me and @refri were correct with our assessment, seems like Thanefield used the proposal to get exit liquidity. They don’t list GNO on their portfolio page any longer.

Let this be a lesson for the future!

1 Like
44

I don’t quite understand what you’re trying to convey.

Conducting buybacks below book value is essentially free money for the remaining GNO holders. If someone is purchasing $1 worth of assets for $0.50, it’s a good investment regardless of who is on the other side.

If you check on-chain, Thanefield only held 3.3k GNO and very likely sold at a loss given the market conditions—thereby increasing the intrinsic value for the remaining GNO holders. You should be thanking them.

So no, they didn’t approve the buybacks with their 3.3k GNO stake.

The proposal was approved by 192 other voters representing 87k GNO—the vote with the highest engagement ever.

1 Like
45

We never listed GNO on our portfolio page. Listing liquid positions is not standard practice. We bought the token on the open market like everybody else.

We also don’t write proposals in order to get “exit liquidity”. In our opinion, GIP-100 was a beneficial proposal for Gnosis DAO, and the way the vote went shows that the majority of both large and small tokenholders agreed with us. We will review the proposal and its impacts once the program is over.

46

I just realized that I overstepped the line, I am in no position to accuse you of anything while:

  1. I have no real knowledge about VC industry practices
  2. As gno-investor pointed out, this was a DAO decision with a very high voter turnout and broad support
  3. It is up to each individual/entity how they handle their GNO

Therefore I sincerely apologize.