I don’t know if you’ve been following the drama between @gnosisdao and @kpk_io but it’s getting ridiculous.
I’ve stayed on the sidelines, but after the latest @ensdomains endowment update, it’s time to speak up.
ENS just suggested a new structure that removes the performance fee entirely.
Sounds good at first glance. Cleaner, simpler, predictable.
But it's not.
If KPK accepted this change while also “cutting fees by 40 percent”… that means one thing:
They were massively overpaid since day one.
Otherwise they would have rejected it instantly.
The second issue is even bigger.
They removed the performance component, but kept the management fee.
Which means:
KPK now gets paid the same whether they outperform, underperform, or just sit in @aave.
Just use Aave @Marczeller
And let’s be honest… the last three years tell the story.
Net returns barely beat CPI. (Inflation)
If an asset manager can’t outperform inflation in crypto markets, what exactly are we paying for?
@nicksdjohnson
Asset management is supposed to grow the treasury, protect purchasing power, and actively manage risk.
An AUM-only model pays for custody not performance.
This isn’t alignment.
It’s a fee structure where the manager wins regardless of results, and the DAO absorbs all downside.
@ensdomains wake up.
DAOs deserve transparency, benchmarking, and real incentives.
DAOs deserve real performance from asset managers.
Happy to dive deeper, share data, or propose alternative structures that actually align incentives.
But pretending this is “good for the DAO” is false.
@alextnetto
These are the angels in KPK. Is there a conflict of interest?
Should we talk?
2.01 K
24
El contenido al que estás accediendo se ofrece por terceros. A menos que se indique lo contrario, OKX no es autor de la información y no reclama ningún derecho de autor sobre los materiales. El contenido solo se proporciona con fines informativos y no representa las opiniones de OKX. No pretende ser un respaldo de ningún tipo y no debe ser considerado como un consejo de inversión o una solicitud para comprar o vender activos digitales. En la medida en que la IA generativa se utiliza para proporcionar resúmenes u otra información, dicho contenido generado por IA puede ser inexacto o incoherente. Lee el artículo enlazado para más detalles e información. OKX no es responsable del contenido alojado en sitios de terceros. Los holdings de activos digitales, incluidos stablecoins y NFT, suponen un alto nivel de riesgo y pueden fluctuar mucho. Debes considerar cuidadosamente si el trading o holding de activos digitales es adecuado para ti según tu situación financiera.