Posting a quick one since folks are asking about last night.
Binance got hit for ~$6.3B, the biggest exchange hack on record, attributed to North Korea’s TraderTraitor. GTC caught the splash damage.
The attacker offloaded a pile of mid-cap tokens into the market to cash out, GTC was one of them, and the price took a hit last night, we
What we did overnight:
Pulled our liquidity from the affected DeFi pools so the dump couldn’t chew through thin markets.
Watched Tally + Snapshot through the night for any governance moves. Nothing attempted, nothing passed.
Treasury untouched.
On Binance’s side: they’ve reserved 6.34B of company funds to cover it,~3B already frozen on-chain w/ partners, and committed to making all users whole and verifying through Proof of Reserves. They’re also buying back the stolen altcoins in matching amounts via OTC and on-exchange, GTC included, which may put an OTC deal on our table.
TL:DR: price moved w/ the dump and should settle as the market does. Governance, treasury, and funds are all intact. We’ll keep watching and post again if anything material shifts.
Please let us know if this available as soon as possible please, and we’ll proceed for the next step.
Thank you so much.
i am curious to hear the dao deliberate about whether we want to pursue this, and under what terms. i have not deliberated this and have not decided my take on it.
some facts:
the DAO has about 14m GTC on balance sheet, and could do this if stewards vote for it.
on the other hand, i was thinking that the 14m GTC could be better used to back the new trustgraph x stewards pilots.
the DAO has the power to increase GTC supply by about 2% per year but has never elected to do so
Disclaimer: This post is for informative purposes only and is not financial advice. This post reflects my personal views, not a decision or commitment by Gitcoin governance. Forward-looking items in it are targets, not commitments. The information in these posts is subject to change as we continue learning. This post may contain estimates, may contain errors, and is provided on a best-effort basis. DYOR, do not make any financial decisions based on these posts.
I respectfully believe Gitcoin DAO should reconsider selling such a substantial portion of its treasury to Binance through a private OTC transaction.
Binance has publicly committed to fully covering the losses and replenishing the stolen assets through market purchases and OTC transactions. Therefore, I believe Binance should prioritize acquiring the required GTC directly from the open market rather than relying on the DAO’s treasury.
This approach would offer several advantages:
It would preserve Gitcoin DAO’s treasury reserves and its ability to fund future ecosystem development.
It would generate genuine market demand for GTC through direct purchases.
It would allow Binance to fulfill its compensation commitment without requiring the DAO to surrender a significant portion of its holdings.
It would demonstrate confidence in GTC’s market liquidity and long-term sustainability.
I also encourage Gitcoin DAO to consider a transparent, independently funded buyback program in the future, subject to governance approval and sustainable financial resources.
The goal should be to protect affected Binance users while also protecting Gitcoin’s treasury, ecosystem, and long-term token holders.
Both objectives can be achieved without unnecessarily transferring a substantial portion of the DAO’s reserves through a private transaction.
I am in favor taking the OTC deal. It’s obviously a difficult situation and we should do what we can to help Binance.
We can then also DCA buyback the tokens from DAO reserves over time. But opportunities to convert GTC to USD without market impact don’t come along too often, so do the conversion now and gradually buyback over time would be my instinct
we asked what terms, no response from their team yet.
--
Disclaimer: This post is for informative purposes only and is not financial advice. This post reflects my personal views, not a decision or commitment by Gitcoin governance. Forward-looking items in it are targets, not commitments. The information in these posts is subject to change as we continue learning. This post may contain estimates, may contain errors, and is provided on a best-effort basis. DYOR, do not make any financial decisions based on these posts.
It clarifies that announcing a buyback of a non-security crypto asset does not constitute a promise of essential managerial efforts when the network is functional and has no central party.
For Gitcoin, I think that means we’d likely want any proposal to demonstrate:
Decentralized control: No central party directing the network’s success or token economics.
Functional utility: GTC has genuine utility independent of buyback expectations.
Transparent governance: Publicly disclosed funding, execution rules, and oversight.
No promises of returns: Buybacks aren’t marketed as yield or guaranteed appreciation.
Legal review: Independent counsel assesses the program against applicable laws.
I’d consider support for exploring a structure that meets these principles, but wouldn’t want GitcoinDAO to consider buybacks before establishing that foundation.
Disclaimer: This post is for informative purposes only and is not financial advice. This post reflects my personal views, not a decision or commitment by Gitcoin governance. Forward-looking items in it are targets, not commitments. The information in these posts is subject to change as we continue learning. This post may contain estimates, may contain errors, and is provided on a best-effort basis. DYOR, do not make any financial decisions based on these posts.