cd5b061567
- Source: inbox/archive/2024-02-18-futardio-proposal-engage-in-50000-otc-trade-with-pantera-capital.md - Domain: internet-finance - Extracted by: headless extraction cron (worker 6) Pentagon-Agent: Rio <HEADLESS>
44 lines
No EOL
2.6 KiB
Markdown
44 lines
No EOL
2.6 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
type: entity
|
|
entity_type: decision_market
|
|
name: "MetaDAO: Engage in $50,000 OTC Trade with Pantera Capital"
|
|
domain: internet-finance
|
|
status: failed
|
|
parent_entity: "[[metadao]]"
|
|
platform: "futardio"
|
|
proposer: "HfFi634cyurmVVDr9frwu4MjGLJzz9XbAJz981HdVaNz"
|
|
proposal_url: "https://www.futard.io/proposal/H59VHchVsy8UVLotZLs7YaFv2FqTH5HAeXc4Y48kxieY"
|
|
proposal_date: 2024-02-18
|
|
resolution_date: 2024-02-23
|
|
category: "fundraise"
|
|
summary: "Pantera Capital proposed acquiring $50,000 USDC worth of META tokens through OTC trade with 20% immediate transfer and 80% vested over 12 months"
|
|
tracked_by: rio
|
|
created: 2026-03-11
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
# MetaDAO: Engage in $50,000 OTC Trade with Pantera Capital
|
|
|
|
## Summary
|
|
Pantera Capital proposed a $50,000 OTC purchase of META tokens from The Meta-DAO treasury, structured as 20% immediate transfer and 80% linear vesting over 12 months. The price per META was to be determined as the minimum of the average TWAP of pass/fail markets and $100. The proposal failed, indicating market rejection of the terms or strategic direction.
|
|
|
|
## Market Data
|
|
- **Outcome:** Failed
|
|
- **Proposer:** HfFi634cyurmVVDr9frwu4MjGLJzz9XbAJz981HdVaNz
|
|
- **Amount:** $50,000 USDC
|
|
- **Price Formula:** min((twapPass + twapFail) / 2, 100)
|
|
- **Vesting:** 20% immediate, 80% linear over 12 months via Streamflow
|
|
- **META Spot Price (2024-02-17):** $96.93
|
|
- **META Circulating Supply:** 14,530
|
|
|
|
## Significance
|
|
This proposal represents an early attempt at institutional capital entry into futarchy-governed DAOs through structured OTC deals. The failure is notable because it suggests either:
|
|
1. Market skepticism about the valuation terms (price cap at $100 vs spot of $96.93)
|
|
2. Concern about dilution impact on existing holders
|
|
3. Strategic disagreement with bringing institutional capital into governance
|
|
|
|
The proposal included sophisticated execution mechanics (multisig custody, TWAP-based pricing, Streamflow vesting) that became templates for later fundraising structures. The involvement of multiple community members (0xNallok, 7Layer, Proph3t) as multisig signers showed early governance scaffolding.
|
|
|
|
## Relationship to KB
|
|
- [[metadao]] - failed fundraising proposal
|
|
- [[futarchy-based fundraising creates regulatory separation because there are no beneficial owners and investment decisions emerge from market forces not centralized control]] - tested institutional OTC structure
|
|
- [[MetaDAOs Autocrat program implements futarchy through conditional token markets where proposals create parallel pass and fail universes settled by time-weighted average price over a three-day window]] - used TWAP pricing mechanism |