Question about fund management

Safe Ecosystem General Discussion
1

Is This Really Fund Management?

In the span of just 1-2 months, safeDAO has suffered a staggering loss of $335,099,867. Meanwhile, karpatkey seems to have done little more than charge exorbitant management fees of $100,000 every month!

Here are the transactions for May and June.

Is This Approach Justified?

As a manager, karpatkey seems to have let down safeDAO by failing to protect its assets, instead leading to losses. All the while, they continue to levy hefty management fees each month for seemingly no work.

Are There Better Alternatives?

Wouldn’t it be a more prudent choice if these management fees were invested back into bolstering the safe ecosystem? Or perhaps we should consider a profit-sharing model for karpatkey, based on the profitability of the treasure? Wouldn’t that be a more reasonable approach?

A Call for Accountability

Let’s not blindly apply traditional finance management methods to entities like safeDAO, where individuals can easily reap substantial profits without any accountability!

4 Likes
2

I believe Karpatkey only manages the joint Gnosis/Safe treasury - karpatkey

@amy.sg can confirm.

4

Yes, Karpatkey’s current mandate is for the GnosisDAO <> SafeDAO joint treasury.

5

@Lao_Pho - the SAFE Dao treasury has been effected by the change in SAFE token price - no loss of value has occurred due to Karpatkey’s action. karpatkeys management is focused on the joint treasury and you can see their activity as well in the link above. They are actively proving liquidity and supporting activities for the SAFE/GNOSIS shared treasury
Also just a note - the SAFE DAO hasn’t loss anything since it still holds the tokens one can’t lose something until they convert it to another token. 1 SAFE = 1 SAFE.

5 Likes
6

What is going on with the fee engine, is it not in the works to be turned any longer ? Were seeing a serouies decline in market vaule over the last few months. If there is a plan to turn it what is the time line

3 Likes
7

A few remarks as a Safe Guardian, some of them opinionated:

Or perhaps we should consider a profit-sharing model for karpatkey, based on the profitability of the treasure?

This is a pretty standard arrangement in the world of fund management and is worth considering.

no loss of value has occurred due to Karpatkey’s action.

I think it’s important to keep this in mind. Karpatkey can’t magically keep the token afloat and shouldn’t be expected to. Rather than dismissing actors it’s more productive to look at token fundamentals: SAFE has a high FDV and a pretty aggressive inflation due to its unlock schedule.

The right way to deal with these fundamental issues is to model out its tokenomics and balance out SAFE inflation due to new issuance with appropriate sinks, such as the previously mentioned fee engine. There seems to be progress here based on the Token Utility Sprint 1.

A tokenomic dashboard evaluating the net flow of issuance vs. sinks would be exceptionally helpful here, as well as economic models of future expected sinks.

Also just a note - the SAFE DAO hasn’t loss anything since it still holds the tokens one can’t lose something until they convert it to another token. 1 SAFE = 1 SAFE.

This is disingeneous in economic terms. The SafeDAO has lost purchasing power with its native crypto-asset, the SAFE token, in the previous three months.

1 Like
8

Do you actually understand the differences between treasury manager and market maker?

Both are two distinct functions within the financial sector, each with its own objectives, activities, and responsibilities.

Market Maker

A market maker is an intermediary that provides liquidity to financial markets by being ready to buy and sell securities at any time. They facilitate trading and ensure that there is always a buyer or seller available.

Treasury Management

Treasury management involves managing a company’s financial resources to ensure liquidity, reduce financial risk, and optimize returns on investments.

The loss of 300MioUSD purely relate to misconceptions of the TTE, the wrong assumption the SAFE can generate any demand by itself, market maker who cannot connect the dots and wrong SAFE management.

Honestly, the only the treasury manager can do is to swap as many SAFE and buy back the token once they are totally worthless.

The assumption that SAFE = SAFE and therefore there’s no loss is completely wrong. For many years, USD = USD, despite trillions of newly printed USD affecting the market annually. It’s true that you only realize losses or gains when you actively swap SAFE for ETH, USDC erc.

Outside of this forum, SAFE is useless and there are no indicators that this will change in the future. You honestly shouldn’t expected the treasury manager solving a critical issue of the SAFE project. (No demand = high sell pressure = price drops)

One major issue is not how many SAFE tokens SafeDAO holds, but whether they can convert these tokens into an acceptable currency without causing a significant price drop. It’s important to remember that the majority of OBRA initiatives require payments in fiat currency. (because of salary payment’s from grantee)

Isn’t the critical question how much fiat currency remains from the First Token Sale in 2022, and at what point SafeDAO will need to actively swap millions of SAFE tokens to fiat without buyers or OTC traders available?

Gnosis Safe Raises $100M And Rebrands As Safe - The Defiant ?

1 Like