@esk3nder, thank you for the comprehensive and honest feedback.
We would like to first highlight the scope of work that differentiates kpk from traditional asset managers, such as Blackrock, which charges 25bp to simply hold BTC and ETH via their ETF products.
Our work for the DAO is not limited to only simple endowment management activities, but also encompasses:
- Financial reporting for the ENS DAO, partnered with Steakhouse, producing monthly reports and a Dune Dashboard;
- Monthly reporting on the Endowment provided on our website;
- Weekly reporting in Metagov meetings;
- Cash flow management (as exemplified in our recent TWAP execution);
- Implementing management technologies from our non-custodial stack to empower the DAO to fully custody their funds, including preventing attacks using onchain permissions and plans to automate management via agents;
- Negotiating bespoke deals such as the revenue share agreement with partners such as Stader Labs to achieve returns otherwise not available; and
- Presentation and discussion of the DAO’s financial position in Metagov working group meetings.
Our fees (tracked here) were initially set more than two years ago, and slightly revised in January with the introduction of a fee cap. We recognise that market conditions and DAO revenue have changed since the launch of the Endowment, while the goals of the ENS DAO and the Endowment have remained relatively unchanged.
We agree that the fees charged should be optimised to reduce drag, and fit within the DAO’s current expenses. We’re happy to revisit the fee structure with the Metagov working group to ensure it is meeting the DAO’s needs and remains competitive. In the meantime, we will incorporate your feedback into these discussions.