GIP-131: Should Gnosis DAO continue and update the Gnosis Pay Cashback Programme?

[nesk]

I’ve read a lot of criticism to this proposal, and a lot of it seem to be from users that don’t want to lose their benefit of farming Gnosis DAO funds, so IMO not even worth responding. After all the DAO has to think long term about the best possible allocation of funds, and not in the 30 users that will switch to use another card because it pays them all. Gnosis growth strategy has never been renting volumes, and it shouldn’t be. If our product is not good enough to retain users after paying them a lot of money to test it, then the money should be spent in developing a better product - not renting volumes for longer.

However you @mrtdlgc and @NolanV raise a bunch of very valid points:

@mrtdlgc

1. Does Gnosis Pay have any kind of connection to the DAO other than being affiliated with Gnosis LTD, not even contractually, but by extension of influence?

Yes, Gnosis Pay is owned by Gnosis LTD. However, Gnosis LTD itself has completed a legal transformation into a quasi foundation (a Company Ltd by guarantee without share capital). There’s no dual equity-token structure. The entity is now a purely purpose driven organization, with the objective to further the Gnosis ecosystem and decentralised technologies more generally.

Edit: I made a mistake regarding Gnosis Pay ownership. Gnosis Pay is actually owned by companies that belong to the founders, since interfacing with licensed businesses and applying for licenses requires a UBO list without ICO-era crypto companies. However, there are legal provisions in place that ensure that no value can be taken out of these companies by the shareholders, and profits accrue to the GNO token. So technically, the answer here is no, but factually, everything belongs to the DAO. This has been cleared by the founders here

@mrtdlgc

2. Has Gnosis Pay offered any kind of accountability to the DAO so far?

Define accountability. You can see all public data in this Dune Dashboard, you know how much we are spending because of the DAO funding proposal… what do you think it’s missing?

@mrtdlgc

3. Why should the DAO keep subsidizing an entity with zero transparency since its inception to the DAO?

I think you’re missing the plot here. Everyone in the Gnosis ecosystem is highly committed to making Gnosis great. There are a lot of valid criticism that can (and probably should) be done regarding its strategy, but focusing in how aligned or misaligned Gnosis LTD and Gnosis DAO are makes no sense. We read stories every week about founders that quit after vesting, yet we still see Gnosis founders showing up to work week after week, after almost 10 years.

@mrtdlgc

4. What is really the benefit of Gnosis Pay to the DAO other than having “Gnosis” in its branding and settling transactions (subsidized by the LTD) on Gnosis Chain?

Right now, nothing, as Gnosis Pay is a product in its growth phase and is still not generating an income. Long term, revenue will come mostly from intercharge fees (paid by the merchant), and fx. This will be captured by Gnosis LTD, and it’s for the DAO to decide how GNO will accrue its value, but as I mentioned above, Gnosis LTD is an ownerless organisation with the purpose of benefiting Gnosis ecosystem.

@NolanV

But to not want to keep the “big spenders” shows a complete lack of understanding of how this kind of business works. Who do you think GnosisPay is going to sell its services to? The person who spends €100 a month? Or the European who spends > €2000?

It’s not about not wanting to “keep large spenders”. It’s about where to put the money. I agree we need (1) an App (we are working on it) and (2) marketing-marketing-marketing. All of that is covered under GIP 128. This is just for the cashbacks - and in it’s current form is only targeting crypto users.