Thanks for your comments.
You’re right. Then a transfer to a SAFE is a required step.
karpatkey would only be able to operate within the boundaries established by the DAO. I believe that DAOs in general should focus on their core business and leave treasury management to dedicated parties rather than trying to tackle everything themselves.
We’d like to take this opportunity to chime in and share our view on this proposal.
According to Aragon’s records, the DAO’s treasury exposure to ETH at the time of writing is approximately 72% of the entire portfolio. Lido should diversify the portfolio and secure enough stablecoins to guarantee a minimum runway of 2 years’ worth of expenses—without sacrificing the ETH price upside once the bull market returns. Current run-rate’s range mean for the DAO according to this proposal’s context info is around $1.5M/month, which accounts for roughly $33.6M over the new 2 years.
One potential path is to sell 10,000 ETH (~$16M) and use the existing DAI holdings (~$17.35M) to fund the operation over this period. The proposed transaction could be executed through CoW Protocol and their Milkman project, which allows to defer the choice of the limit price from order initiation (pre DAO vote) to order execution time (solver settling the trade). ENS has already executed an identical proposal successfully.
Additionally, staking the remaining ~10,304 ETH would increase capital efficiency without adding operational complexity to the DAO, while promoting the protocol’s own value proposition.
While there are more complex alternatives such as collateralizing stETH to borrow DAI on MakerDAO, the DAO may not be able to actively monitor these positions at this stage.
Good treasury management practices are critical for any DAO looking to survive in the long term, and it’s encouraging to see Lido moving in this direction.
how are we back to this place? didnt we just sell a bunch of ldo tokens to do the run way?
why are we here again
In our view it’s less about raising specific runway months and more about asking token holders what the allocation principles should be for the treasury.
One of @Hasu 's comments in the summary threads has been quite pointed and relevant:
It would be great to have a committee of DAO community members to form this initial group and set these principles in public. However, even with this committee, decisions of the size we are asking for would have to require token holder approval (let alone they would have to approve it on Aragon).
+1 On building out treasury allocation principles as well as Hasu’s point on run rate best practices. Happy to help & join committee. I can spin up a gov proposal for committee (lol)? Probably something that can set standard across DAOs more generally tbh.