Let’s talk about @LidoFinanceLidoFinanceLidoFinanceLidoFinance $LDO
1. They position themselves as a “top-tier staking” project—boasting the largest amount of staked $ETH and a long-standing, proven track record.
However, let’s look at it from the perspective of an active crypto community member and examine the problems it faces.
In five years, the project has failed to generate stable revenue; the team spends $40 million annually on itself (operating expenses).
No one understands where such colossal sums are actually going.
2. Governance.
The team completely ignores questions from the community unless they come from developers or delegates close to the project.
As for the delegates, they vote on or discuss *only* those ideas that originate from the project team itself.
Batching, delays, low rates to reduce buybacks — these are all ways to minimize returns to holders. But projects they favor get funded fast. Governance is more form than substance, ultimately serving the vested interests of a few
3. Buybacks.
On the forum (research.lido.fi), you can find numerous threads and proposals regarding buybacks that the team has ignored for years. These topics simply get lost in the forum, and no one ever revisits them.
When $LDO began to look like useless junk, the NEST program was launched after six months of discussion.
Two months after the launch, exactly $0 worth of buybacks had been executed through it.
You might ask why. It’s because the team set a condition that buybacks would only begin once $ETH reached $2,730—a price point we might not see for years—meaning there will be no buybacks until then.
stETH/LDO Buybacks.
A budget of 10,000 stETH was allocated for buybacks, intended to be distributed in monthly tranches of 1,000 stETH.
The initial price was set at 0.000163 $LDO/$ETH.
After five months, only 2,300 out of the 10,000 have been executed.
Why? …because the team is waiting for the price to drop to that level, fearing they might overpay—even though $LDO already looks dead.
And every month, the team simply lowered the price threshold. Right now, it stands at 0.000153 $LDO/$ETH.
When the issue of raising the threshold to 0.0002 was raised on the forum—and despite three objections against continuing buybacks at current levels—the team simply ignored it (see screenshots).
4. Loss of market share
We can@ether_fial@ether_fi see what @ether_fi ($ETHFI) is rolling out.
Why ETHFI tvl 6b and mcap 600m?
And LDO tvl 24b and mcap 350m?
So,what coin is useless ?
We can all see how $Eigen is growing.
Why don’t we see the same with $LDO?
Because the team is completely stuck in the past and refuses to change anything.
Lido labs needs to cut half the team and make
the programmatic buybacks much more
aggressive on every parameter
This team is burning, an absurd amount of
money relative to their accomplishments and
growth
The token needs to be treat as casino
@LidoFinance team has no sympathy for the $ldo token holders.
They don’t care about the community’s ideas at all.
They have always looked down on the LDO holders
with arrogance. They have always wanted to
monopolize all the benefits of the protocol.
Why does the project prioritize stakers while LDO holders incur losses?
Don’t you think that $10 million in annual buybacks against a FDV of $300 million is a paltry amount?
Can the Lido team provide reports on how the $40 million annual budget for operating expenses and salaries is spent?
Why do some projects carry out buybacks without any triggers, while Lido—with billions in TVL—imposes conditions just to delay the start of buybacks?
