CIP-62: Core Treasury team mandate and funding

CIP-Draft: Core Treasury team mandate and funding
Authors: Core Treasury Team
Status: Draft
Created: 2025-01-20

Simple Summary

This CIP proposes to consolidate several existing mandates of the Core Treasury team, originally established by CIP-19 (karpatkey Proposal to Create a Core Treasury Team) and to request an allocation of 80 million COW tokens to empower the team and karpatkey to pursue additional liquidity provisioning, economic opportunities for the treasury tokens, and funding opportunities for the development and execution of CoW DAO product roadmap over the next 4 years (2025-2028).

The goal of this CIP is to strategically allocate COW in connection with long-term partners. The Core Treasury team will enact its best judgement on re-allocating COW between different initiatives in order to maximise the funds generated for CoW DAO’s products.

At the time of writing, we are requesting 80 million COW tokens from the DAO’s currently owned COW tokens.

Motivation

CoW DAO’s products have been revolutionising DeFi and protecting users from MEV since 2022, when the project spun out from GnosisDAO. Since then, CoW Swap & CoW Protocol have facilitated more than $70.8 billion in trading volume, more than $187 billion of value has been protected by MEV Blocker and more than $27 million of volume has been supercharged by CoW AMM’s features.

CoW Swap currently stands as the #1 UI for attracting trading volume, combining unparalleled ease of use with advanced trading tools to deliver an optimal user experience where price improvements are shared with users. CoW Swap & CoW Protocol makes CoW DAO’s products recognized as the largest intent aggregator, seamlessly connecting users to the best trading opportunities, and the second-largest DEX aggregator in Mainnet, enabling efficient and optimized decentralized trades.

As an innovator in intent-based decentralized exchanges (DEXs), we lead the industry by setting new standards for trading efficiency. Additionally, our pioneering LVR-resistant AMM technology mitigates the risks associated with impermanent loss, providing users with greater stability and profitability.

We also take pride in being the first RPC provider to reimburse users, offering a groundbreaking approach to incentivizing and supporting our community, ensuring users are rewarded for their engagement and loyalty.

In addition to these technical and market fit achievements, the team has shown it can also deliver financially, generating 2M net profit for 2024.

This is why, in order to stay ahead of the innovation curve and keep delivering outstanding products, the team would like to increase the buffer of funds in the treasury, to allow scaling up the core team.

CoW DAO’s innovative products operate on top of sophisticated tokenomics and incentive mechanisms, as highlighted in CIP-38 - Solver Computed Fees & Rank by Surplus and CIP-48 - Solver rewards budget renewal and update of CoW DAO bonding pool operations.

As depicted in the image above, there is a gap between the revenue accrued by the DAO and the funds received in the Treasury. All operational income generated is first used to reimburse solvers for gas. As there is a weekly gap between fees charged in native tokens, withdrawal in ETH and payment to solvers, a buffer allocation is kept in ETH in the intermediary contracts to ensure correct operation of the protocol. From the net revenue, the Core Treasury team performs COW buybacks (as per CIP-38 - Solver Computed Fees & Rank by Surplus) and funds the Defense Reserve (vd. CIP-50 - Establishing a Legal Defense Reserve). Only the remaining portion of the net revenue is utilised by the Treasury for active DeFi management. For the development of the DAO’s products, a series of functions and tasks must be performed, which have previously been authorised through several CIPs for IT, business development and grants.

Part of the revenue generated by CoW DAO’s products is converted to COW and used to incentivise the solver competition. Nonetheless, a significant part of CoW’s core development work requires funding for other assets.

This CIP’s intention is to give flexibility to the Treasury to fund the development of the DAO’s products through a new COW token allocation, assuming a continued increase of the amounts to be invested (net of accrued revenue) by 10-20% per year in the period of 2025-2028.

As outlined in CIP-19, karpatkey was mandated to create, train, and support a Core Treasury Team. This mandate has been successfully fulfilled, and the Core Treasury Team now comprises members of both the existing Core Team and karpatkey.

This new CIP seeks to update the mandate of the established Core Treasury Team, building upon the foundation laid by CIP-19 to ensure the continued support of CoW DAO’s long-term development.

Specifications

Given the above, the Core Treasury team requests 80 million COW tokens, that would be allocated to the following initiatives:

  • Development of the CoW DAO products - 42M COW
    • This will cover the majority of the investment plan for the period of 2025-28
  • Defense reserve completion - 5.5M COW
  • Provision of liquidity - 4.5M COW
    • Increase DEX liquidity (mainly on Mainnet and one additional L2), to ensure proper price discovery in DEX markets, in line with the increasing liquidity on centralised exchanges
  • Solver rewards - 16M COW
  • Strategic partnerships - 10M COW
    • This allocation is intended to be used for partnership agreements where CoW DAO’s products are integrated into other web platforms, with the underlying objective of increasing market share and revenue through revenue sharing, increased volume to the Protocol and/or other economic benefits.
  • Other initiatives - 2M COW
    • This allocation is intended to perform opportunistic market awareness activities, such as creating incentives for new solver feature development or for token holders.

The above-mentioned allowances are indicative and flexible, and the Core Treasury team would be mandated to use their best judgment in reallocating funds between each category. For clarity, this means that the total amount requested across all allocations is fixed, but that the amounts allocated to each are what may be changed.

Listings Mandate

The Core Treasury Team’s work as part of the CEX listing initiative, led to the COW token being listed by the following venues:

  • Coinbase
  • Binance
  • Kraken (Perpetuals)
  • Kucoin
  • Gate.io
  • Bitget
  • Crypto.com
  • HiBT
  • MEXC
  • Bitkan
  • Bitmart
  • ZKE
  • Bybit (Perpetuals)

Given the success of the listing strategy, and the fact that more venues will be pursued in Q1 2025, the Core Treasury team requests that the remaining funds from the 4M COW budget allocated under CIP-47 - Funding for the purpose of facilitating the listing COW token on CEXs, be fully utilised for the mandate under this CIP. This means that funds which were originally earmarked to be returned to the DAO on 2025-06-31, will remain under this treasury mandate.

Product Development Mandate

To clarify the amount of 42M COW earmarked for the development of CoW DAO’s products:

  • does not exclude the need for individual service providers or grantees to the DAO to request funding through further CIPs; and
  • is not intended solely to be sold on the open market.

To ensure the responsible utilisation of COW tokens allocated for the development of the CoW DAO’s products the Core Treasury team proposes the following “guidelines”, with all percentages referring to the portion of the allocation designated for the product development mandate:

  • The majority of this allocation cannot be exchanged in the market, and should require limit orders above the previous monthly average price (provided by CoinGecko);
  • To foster collaboration and long-term partnerships, the Core Treasury team may transfer the tokens as follows to entities that can provide substantial long term support to the development and goals of CoW DAO. The Core Treasury team is mandated to pursue the best interest of the DAO and ensure that transactions are done at a higher than market price or at adequate vesting schedules.
  • To maintain a diverse and decentralised ecosystem, no single entity may be transferred more than 3% of the total COW token supply (30M tokens) under these mandates.

Note: Current market value refers to the maximum of the last 4 weekly average values (trailing monthly value), as provided by CoinGecko.

Additional Terms

Validity

This mandate is subject to the approval of CoW DAO’s Governance Mechanism as defined in CoW DAO’s Participation Agreement. In the event CoW DAO does not approve this mandate through its Governance Mechanism, this CIP shall be null and void.

Ownership and Control of Funds

For the avoidance of doubt, any and all funds allocated under this CIP shall remain, at all times, the sole and exclusive property of CoW DAO. All wallets holding funds pursuant to this CIP shall be established as multi-signature wallets, with CoW DAO designated as the ultimate owner. Moreover, CoW DAO shall retain the irrevocable right and ability to withdraw any or all funds from said wallets at its sole and absolute discretion, without notice or limitation and according to CoW DAO Governance Process.

Custody of Funds

Karpatkey DAO is not custodian of funds. Karpatkey DAO will only have the capacity to allocate the funds in a manner such that the CoW DAO authorised signers will have at all times absolute control over them.

Karpatkey DAO is not responsible for the loss of funds caused by the existence, identification, and/or exploitation of vulnerabilities through hacks, consensus failures, sophisticated cyber-attacks, denials of service or other security breaches, attacks, or deficiencies with smart contracts or protocols which are not owned by CoW DAO or Karpatkey DAO.

The plans outlined in this proposal are subject to discussion by CoW DAO and may need to be (re)structured to account for legal, regulatory, or technical developments as well as governance considerations. This document should not be taken as the basis for making investment decisions, nor be construed as a recommendation to engage in any transactions.

Non-Solicitation Clause

During the term of this agreement and for a period of 2 years after its termination or expiration, neither Karpatkey DAO nor CoW DAO shall directly or indirectly solicit, hire, or engage any employee, contractor, or collaborator who is, at the time of such solicitation, employment, or engagement, engaged by the other party, without prior written consent of the other party.

Term & Termination

This CIP shall commence on successful vote and shall remain in full force and effect until the 31st December 2028.

Early Termination

The Core Treasury team may terminate this mandate for convenience by providing four (4) weeks prior written notice in the form of a Forum post.

CoW DAO may terminate this mandate if the termination is approved through CoW DAO’s Governance Mechanism (as defined in CoW DAO’s Participation Agreement); in case termination does not take into account the above-mentioned notice period, four (4) weeks of treasury management fees shall be payable based on average fees paid during the preceding 2 months.

Consequence of Early Termination

In the event of early termination by the Core Treasury Team, the Core Treasury Team shall send the remaining funds to the wallet(s) designated by CoW DAO.

In the event of early termination by CoW DAO, CoW DAO will withdraw any or all funds from the wallets controlled by the Core Treasury Team at its sole and absolute discretion and reallocate the funds at its will and as approved through CoW DAO’s Governance Mechanism.

Miscellaneous (in no particular order)

Subcontracting. The Core Treasury team may subcontract any portion of the mandate to be performed under this CIP and remains responsible for the obligations under this CIP.

Assignment. The Core Treasury team and CoW DAO may at any time assign, mortgage, charge, subcontract, delegate, declare a trust over or deal in any other manner with any or all of its rights and obligations under this CIP.

Confidentiality. All information obtained privately (i.e. not via public discourse, such as blockchain transactions or on the CoW DAO Forum) shall remain the sole and exclusive property of the disclosing party (including CoW DAO and the Core Treasury team ).

Independence of the Parties. The Core Treasury team is an independent contractor and is not an employee, agent, partner, joint venture, legal representative, affiliate, or member of CoW DAO. Nothing in this CIP is intended to, or shall, operate to create a partnership or joint venture of any kind between the Core Treasury team and CoW DAO, nor authorise either party to act as an agent for the other. Neither party has the authority to act in the name or on behalf of, or otherwise bind, the other Party in any way.

Disclaimer. CoW DAO and the Core Treasury team expressly disclaims all representations, warranties, guarantees, conditions and undertakings, including warranties of merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose.

Limitation of liability. The Core Treasury team’s total aggregate liability for all and any claims arising under or in connection with this CIP, regardless of form of action and whether in contract, tort, warranty, or other legal or equitable grounds (including in each case negligence), shall be limited to a maximum amount of USDC 50,000.00, provided that no fraud or gross negligence has occurred. The Core Treasury team shall not be liable for any actions taken by or on behalf of CoW DAO, including services and actions taken pursuant to this CIP.

Force Majeure. If the provision of the Services is affected, hindered, prohibited or made impossible in whole or in part by a Force Majeure, this shall under no circumstances be deemed a breach of this CIP.

Severance. If any provision of this CIP is or becomes invalid, illegal or unenforceable, it shall be deemed modified to the minimum extent necessary to make it valid, legal and enforceable.

Disputes. In the event of any dispute, claim, question, or disagreement, CoW DAO and the Core Treasury team shall use their best efforts to settle the disagreement. To this effect, they shall consult and negotiate with each other in good faith (using the CoW DAO forum (forum.cow.fi) or any other Interface) and, recognising their mutual interests, attempt to reach a just and equitable solution satisfactory to both parties. Any such amicable decision to resolve a dispute shall go through the CoW DAO Governance Mechanism. If no agreement is found within thirty (30) days, the disagreement shall be referred to and finally resolved by arbitration to be administered by the Cayman International Mediation & Arbitration Centre (CI-MAC) and governed by the Arbitration Act (as amended) of the Cayman Islands. The arbitration shall be conducted in the English language and the place of arbitration shall be in George Town, Grand Cayman, Cayman Islands. The number of arbitrators shall be one. The decision of the sole arbitrator to any such dispute, controversy, difference or claim shall be final and binding upon both parties.

Governing Law. This CIP shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the Cayman Islands, without regard to or application of the conflicts of laws, rules or principles.

Execution: Proposed transaction/ Payment

Transactions will be executed on CoW DAO’s Safe using the oSnap plugin, contingent upon successful passing of this CIP. When voting on Snapshot, participants are encouraged to verify the content, cross-check Tenderly simulations, and confirm alignment with the CIP’s intent.

Transaction Data

{

"chainId": "1",

"createdAt": 1735637729658,

"meta": {

"checksum": "0xf9ccdc6a96fec0c61d17c5da22f5a0789f01bc72b0a6f3c63bb19afa1c5caf68",

"createdFromOwnerAddress": "",

"createdFromSafeAddress": "0xcA771eda0c70aA7d053aB1B25004559B918FE662",

"description": "",

"name": "Transactions Batch",

"txBuilderVersion": "1.17.1"

},

"transactions": [

{

"contractInputsValues": {

"amount": "80000000000000000000000000",

"recipient": "0x616dE58c011F8736fa20c7Ae5352F7f6FB9F0669"

},

"contractMethod": {

"inputs": [

{

"internalType": "address",

"name": "recipient",

"type": "address"

},

{

"internalType": "uint256",

"name": "amount",

"type": "uint256"

}

],

"name": "transfer",

"payable": false

},

"data": null,

"to": "0xDEf1CA1fb7FBcDC777520aa7f396b4E015F497aB",

"value": "0"

}

],

"version": "1.0"

}
3 Likes

I support this proposal, as the extra funds in the managed treasury will allow for needed funds to the expansion of CoW Protocol and other initiatives.

I want to express my support of this proposal.
A principled approach to treasury management is critical for securing the long-term success of CoW DAO. With its tremendous growth potential, it’s essential to proactively secure funding to sustainably expand our suite of products, features, and usage metrics.

Providing liquidity for the COW token and allocating resources for strategic partnerships will be impactful in driving growth and securing new opportunities.

This proposal aligns with the DAO’s long-term vision, and I believe it sets a strong foundation for continued innovation and success.

2 Likes

I echo @middleway.eth sentiments, and support this proposal. Bring on snapshot!

1 Like

We appreciate the idea of granting the Core Treasury Team flexibility in reallocating the 80M COW tokens, but we would like more clarity on exactly when DAO approval is required and when decisions can be made unilaterally by the Treasury team.

For example, under CIP-24, funding for core development was proposed and discussed in the forum. Will similar proposals continue to be brought to the DAO, or does the Treasury team now have the authority to allocate these funds on its own discretion?

Given the large scale of this allocation—significantly bigger than what was introduced in CIP-19, we believe it is crucial to clearly define how the DAO retains oversight and ensures transparency around how and when these funds are deployed.

Additionally, could you let us know if the fee structure and multisig configuration are still the same as in CIP-19, or if there have been any changes?

2 Likes

@Tane do you think this clause makes it clear enough that the Core Treasury Team cannot allocate treasury assets to third parties without the passing of a dedicated CIP?

Hi @Tane, thanks for your questions!

All service providers will continue to adhere to the established funding request process, as no changes have been made to it. This CIP proposes empowering the Core Treasury Team to streamline and enhance the execution of fund provisioning. This will ensure the team is better prepared to allocate the funds anticipated to be requested, contingent upon DAO approval of the funding.

Regarding the fee structure, it remains the same as CIP-19.

1 Like

Moved to Snapshot:

https://snapshot.org/#/s:cow.eth/proposal/0xdf9c7d3c8964de744c6bf99a89f60833e8904953bbe3e1c6856eb59939f82a2f

Thank you, @middleway.eth and @karpatkey, for your detailed responses. We needed some additional clarification since the product development fund seemed out of scope from the standard treasury management at first glance. Everything is clear for us now.

2 Likes

Thank you for the ambitious proposal! As in CIP-59 Defou S.A. has taken already credit for some of the listings you mention, could you please elaborate what were karpatkey’s specific contributions towards the listings on Coinbase, Binance and Kraken and ideally present some form of proof. Absent that anyone involved with CoWSwap in any capacity during that time can claim they have played a role in the listings.

2 Likes

A lot of comments and questions regarding this CIP, I’m a bit shocked by the amount of obfuscated details in this proposal that was already moved to snapshot:

  • First of all, there’s a clear misconnection between the “Motivation” and the proposal. karpatkey is not Cow. And the fact that Cow is a very successful product has nothing to do with any work karpatkey has done, nor justify allocating 80M COW tokens to you.
  • Before moving forward with a further allocation and increase in fees, would like to understand what value has karpatkey added in the past year. The last report was posted one year ago. Furthermore, I don’t see any mention to fees in such a report.
  • What does it mean that 42m COW will be utilised to “Development of CoW DAO products”? Are you gonna dump 40m tokens? If so, please stop the buybacks, why would we do buybacks with the revenues, but at the same time sell part of the treasury?
  • Even if these tokens were to be allocated, if the plan is to use them over 4 years, why would we allocate them all at once? We should NOT pay any AUM fee for COW tokens. Those will be sitting in the wallet doing nothing until karpatkey manages to sell them. Let’s just do a TWAP and show everyone the most efficient way to diversify a treasury. But we don’t have to pay 200k COW/yr for doing this.
  • Same for the Defense reserve, the solver rewards and the “strategic partnerships” fund. Why would we pay karpatkey for that? So that they can move the funds?
  • I second what @BovineManure said above. Please, explain your contributions for getting COW listed on these CEXes. I have met some core team members who were not aware of the listing happening prior to their announcement. So you are suggesting that karpatkey knew about it prior to the team, and didn’t let them know?
  • Limitation of liability clause: how come karpatkey, which is managing the entire treasury, will only be liable for a lesser amount than their quarterly fees? This is just absurd.

I’m not against engaging with karpatkey, but this proposal as it is written here IMO is just a no-go, it need a lot of reiteration and explanations before actually moving forward. But since it has already moved to snapshot, I will vote against.

2 Likes

Thanks for your comments @BovineManure and @dung.

This proposal was created to consolidate several mandates of the Core Treasury team, which karpatkey is part of. It was sent to Snapshot following CoWDAO guidelines, after a 7-day discussion period.

Core Treasury team role in Listings

CIP-47 defines well what was the part of the Core Treasury team in that initiative, and the current CIP only asks for the consolidation of all mandates under this new one.

Tokens under management and karpatkey’s fees:

First of all, we would like to clarify that karpatkey does not have these assets under management—this is not an allocation to karpatkey. karpatkey operates as a non-custodial treasury manager, ensuring that the DAO retains full control over its treasury and DAO-owned wallets.

That being said, while karpatkey has contributed to CoW DAO’s success through various initiatives and collaborations that have had a demonstrable positive impact (more in a section below) — karpatkey completely agrees that CoW stands as a highly successful product in its own right. karpatkey is genuinely happy for the entire community and for the core team’s dedication and hard work in building and evolving the product.

karpatkey operates with full transparency. Reports are published on a monthly basis and are always available on the website, where anyone can review the latest updates on the DAO’s treasury. Additionally, karpatkey is continuously enhancing its services by improving risk management, asset allocation frameworks, and security measures to maintain its position as the leading on-chain treasury asset manager in crypto.

Importantly, karpatkey is not increasing any fees at this stage. In fact, karpatkey voluntarily did not charge fees for the second half of last year to support the DAO’s financial position. The goal remains to allocate significant resources toward ensuring the long-term success of the protocol, all while balancing its role as a business.

In short:

  • karpatkey does not charge AUM or management fees on COW tokens unless an actual treasury management action is performed.
  • Fees are only applied if karpatkey actively execute transactions, structure deals, or integrate COW tokens into treasury strategies like protocol-owned liquidity.
  • If COW tokens simply remain in the DAO’s treasury wallet and no action is taken, there are no fees charged.

This is clearly outlined in the mandate, and this approach ensures that the DAO is only charged for actual work performed, rather than passive asset holdings.

Core Treasury team strategy regarding token allocations:

To address the questions regarding the 42 million COW allocation, this amount represents the expected budget for product development over the next few years. This estimate was provided by the core team and reflects the actual projected costs associated with developing CoW DAO’s products, factoring in multiple financial projections that were included in the proposal.

Now, are those 42 million COW tokens being dumped? Absolutely not. The very reason this proposal is live to ensure that these funds are deployed in the most efficient and market-friendly way possible, minimizing any adverse price impact.

Our approach as the Core Treasury team will likely involve a combination of open market strategies, including TWAP execution and more discretionary, strategic sales/allocations. TWAP execution is always a valid option for treasury diversification, but it is not always the most efficient strategy since it inherently involves selling through open markets, which can introduce higher slippage and price impact than other execution methods. One of our primary strategies might be to facilitate OTC deals and strategic partnerships, allowing us to sell COW tokens without impacting the market price. This ensures that token buyers engage directly through OTC channels, rather than through the open market, which could otherwise cause unnecessary price volatility.

Throughout this process, we will maintain full transparency. Whenever community involvement is necessary, we will engage with governance accordingly. However, it’s also important to recognize that OTC deals and strategic treasury operations often involve market-sensitive information. In those cases, we will act in the best interest of the DAO, ensuring that execution is handled responsibly and strategically.

If at any point, our execution strategy conflicts with the ongoing buyback program, we will explicitly inform the community. If needed, we will pause the buybacks, propose a revised mandate, and allow the community to vote on the direction before making any adjustments.

The reasoning behind requesting the full allocation now rather than distributing it over time is simple: efficient treasury planning requires proactive, not reactive, execution.

  • By securing these tokens now, we can carefully structure the execution plan and implement it gradually over the four-year period.
  • Treasury management is about long-term sustainability, and waiting until later to request funding introduces unnecessary risk. If the DAO were to request these funds incrementally, there is no guarantee that future COW token prices will be as favorable as they are today.
  • Similar to how companies and institutions plan budgets in advance, we are ensuring that CoW DAO has a clear roadmap and financial stability to avoid emergency funding situations later on.

We strongly believe that the best time to build a sustainable treasury is always now.

Karpatkey proposals/contributions to CoW DAO

Below is a chronological list of proposals and updates put forward by karpatkey through the CoW DAO governance process and contributions to the CoW in general.

Karpatkey has been actively involved in governance, regularly sharing our views and suggestions on forum proposals. Below is a chronological list of our responses and perspectives on various topics discussed in the forum.

2 Likes

@karpatkey just to confirm my understanding of your contribution from the referenced proposal:

You were a signer on a multisig holding earmarked assets and at some point signed a transaction to sent said assets to the CEX with whom you did not interact at any point.

Shall we also reward the validator who proposed the block in which the transactions were included, it seems their contribution to the Coinbase and Binance listing was not correctly credited?

Thank you @BovineManure and @dung for the comments. I’ll focus on @dung comments as I think Karpatkey’s provides some clarity already:

Q1: First of all, there’s a clear misconnection between the “Motivation” and the proposal. karpatkey is not Cow. And the fact that Cow is a very successful product has nothing to do with any work karpatkey has done, nor justify allocating 80M COW tokens to you.

The Core Treasury team is a joint task force encompassing Karpatkey and members of the Core team. This team, other than using Karpatkey’s knowledge on treasury management, has been focusing on ensuring medium-long term diversification of the Treasury assets, so that Product Development is possible to be funded.

To clarify, the requested 80M COW under this mandate will be used for operational budgets (e.g. incentivisation of integrations, liquidity provisioning, diversifying the DAO’s treasury allowing the core team and other teams to apply for future funding). As stated in the proposal, the tokens are not being allocated to Karpatkey, but to a joint managed safe, ownership of CoW DAO.

Q3: What does it mean that 42m COW will be utilised to “Development of CoW DAO products”? Are you gonna dump 40m tokens? If so, please stop the buybacks, why would we do buybacks with the revenues, but at the same time sell part of the treasury?

As highlighted in the specific subsection, these funds are not intended to be solely sold in the open market, and the goal is to pursue strategic allocations with industry partners, investors and others, to raise the funds needed for development of CoW products for the years to come.

It is part of the joint Treasury Core Team mandate to ensure the DAO has sufficient diversification and medium-long term funding to continue improving on the DAO’s products.

The existence of the buybacks is a key tokenomics feature of CoW Protocol, and should be seen as part of the mechanism functioning and separate from the treasury management function.

Q4:Even if these tokens were to be allocated, if the plan is to use them over 4 years, why would we allocate them all at once? We should NOT pay any AUM fee for COW tokens. Those will be sitting in the wallet doing nothing until karpatkey manages to sell them. Let’s just do a TWAP and show everyone the most efficient way to diversify a treasury. But we don’t have to pay 200k COW/yr for doing this.

As clarified by Karpatkey, no fee will be charged on idle COW Tokens in the Treasury wallet.

The goal is to ensure that diversification of the treasury is done having a long term view and that the Treasury team is forced to either fund service providers in COW (creating short term sell pressure) or be in a situation where the funding of further development would not be possible. Any tokens raised, will be used for yield farming or investment, ensuring that CoW DAO get a positive net APY during the whole period.

Q6: I second what @BovineManure said above. Please, explain your contributions for getting COW listed on these CEXes. I have met some core team members who were not aware of the listing happening prior to their announcement. So you are suggesting that karpatkey knew about it prior to the team, and didn’t let them know?

The Core Treasury team is not only Karpatkey, but a joint task force as shared above.

This team had a relevant job on negotiating with Wintermute (leading to CIP-51: Wintermute <> COW Liquidity Provision Partnership), which was also a key partner on pursue CeX listings.

As part of the listing processes, the Core Team had to share informations around Treasury Management - from a setup and strategy specific - which the Treasury team supported on. Please also note that most of the CeX negotiations were handled by a subset of the core team members and might be the case that not every team member was aware of all undergoing negotiations. Finally, let’s remember that many CEX listings are subject to NDAs limited to a need-to-know basis to avoid any sort of insider trading and/or market manipulation by large token holders.

I think this answers also @BovineManure 's worries.

Q7: Limitation of liability clause: how come karpatkey, which is managing the entire treasury, will only be liable for a lesser amount than their quarterly fees? This is just absurd.

Note that the clause of limitation of liability is pertaining to actions performed by the Core Treasury team (e.g. errors, bad executions performed by the squad, etc). As this does not include external events for which the Treasury Core Team is not responsible, this would be in line with the standard terms of asset managers. In addition, the karpatkey’s mandate is based on a non-custodial deal which means that, without the Core Team, karpatkey would not be able to move funds around. This set up actually reduces liability risks on their end.

Hope this gives more context to both your comments and thanks for contributing to the DAO’s improvement!

2 Likes

This passed: https://snapshot.box/#/s:cow.eth/proposal/0xdf9c7d3c8964de744c6bf99a89f60833e8904953bbe3e1c6856eb59939f82a2f