[PASSED] BIP-4: Swap BIT for FTT

This proposal has been submitted to the BitDAO Snapshot by Alameda Research
Co-authored with cateatpeanut.eth from Windranger


Background

Alameda is a quantitative trading firm bringing expertise from Wall Street and Silicon Valley to provide liquidity in crypto markets worldwide. Alameda is also an investor in FTX, a top tier crypto exchange, and a holder of their exchange token, FTT (FTX).

Terms

  • 100,000,000 BIT tokens (~1% total supply) for 3,362,315 FTT tokens (~1% total supply)
  • Tokens transferred immediately if the proposal passes
    • FTT to BitDAO Treasury address: 0x78605df79524164911c144801f41e9811b7db73d
    • BIT to Alameda address: 0x84D34f4f83a87596Cd3FB6887cFf8F17Bf5A7B83
  • Public commitment not to sell each other’s tokens for 3 years.

Why this makes sense for Alameda

  • We hold a similar vision for a decentralized and tokenized economy.
  • BitDAO has an open mandate and proposal process, and is massively scalable through the creation of specialized Autonomous Entities (such as artist guilds, farming cooperatives, ecosystem funds). BitDAO is likely to become the world’s largest and most influential DAO. Alameda wants to contribute to proposals and have voting power through BIT.

Why this makes sense for BitDAO

  • Alameda can bring great ideas and proposals. BitDAO is open to all ideas and is chain and project agnostic. It is up to BIT token holders to approve and reject proposals.
  • Alameda is a reputable and significant player in the crypto industry, with a track record of supporting builders, and executing on ideas.
  • Exposure to Alameda and to the FTT community.
  • Exposure to FTX performance through FTT. A great addition to the existing Bybit pledge.
  • Media coverage around this swap.
9 Likes

An excellent proposal to increase the exposure and influence of BitDAO. Alameda and SBF have a fantastic portfolio containing some rising stars, such as SOL and SUSHI. It will be interesting to see how much attention will be drawn to BitDAO after this swap and whether other ventures will follow (e.g., A16z).

4 Likes

An excellent solution for mutually beneficial partnerships. Both projects have a great future ahead of them.

3 Likes

I recommend using a stream payment agreement to use locked-in funds, now that it’s a bull market and the commitment is viable. But it is likely to become a bear market in three years. People who believe in blockchain should trust the code and should not go for the so-called verbal promises, which I think will cause BITDAO to fall, and I hope people will oppose this proposal.

5 Likes

Absolutely in favour of a 1:1 partnership with an organization sharing a similar vision. The space needs to nurture as much positive collaboration as possible.

2 Likes
  • Such a huge amount of tokens are exchanged without any substantial plan to serve this purpose. I hope Alameda should come up with a feasible plan to help Bitdao become a better dao, not just a simple token exchange.

  • Alameda should abide by the proposal rules and discuss for a while before going to snapshot voting. The community needs time to ask their questions and think about it in detail.

So as far as the current proposal is concerned, I hope the community rejects this proposal.

3 Likes

I do not support this proposal for many reasons, among them here’s a list:

  • The terms are highly abusive, you basically have the biggest shark in the bay telling you ‘‘Exchange 30:1 with my tokens or else…’’

This is as if your older brother makes you a proposal to exchange your brand new, favorite baseball cards in a 30:1 offering, putting on the table one that has already seen life… (and pumped well beyond 500x).

Then gives you no terms to negotiate at all besides the amount of swapping, directly goes to your parents asking for approval (snapshot already on the way, big boys caring this voting passes), and gives you a word promise of not selling, exchanging, pawning, damaging your cards…

This is Alameda.

…dude it’s not even a week the token is released, and you are already in the snapshot phase? Of course hoping nobody cares, nobody realize, or people simply blindly follow Alameda’s brand.

Other contributors must be stoked!

Is this a joke? Should I add anything to this? We have already seen how FTX, Alameda and company bully and extortion small projects (like reef, if anybody remembers), and many other that are not publicly known.

Make it public, and with legal bounding.
Period.

Where can I find the Alameda DAO…? so where is your vision? In the money of course, no need to dress it up.

Yes indeed, Alameda wants also a piece of the cake.

Only for cash to fund operations, this is exclusively the only reason why this ‘‘could’’ make sense for BitDAO. With the huge list of hyper funded contributors, I do not see any need for fresh money.

It does not make sense.

Everybody can bring great ideas, we are lucky enough to be living on the very edge of a technological revolution, and great minds are NOT lacking.

It does not make sense.

Big bucks and publicity is the only thing they can bring… which is not bad per se, but I worry that BitDAO will simply turn into another spinoff project, money grabbing machine and that the whole vision of decentralized ecosystem will turn only into this, a machine and not a community effort.

3 Likes

I appreciate your concerns, and feel strongly that you’ve made a good argument that it is imperative that anything would include legally binding terms, with all expectations clearly outlined.

With that said, I’ve been searching myself for information with respect to Alameda and Reef’s feud, and I don’t feel comfortable coming to any conclusion. I’ve seen things I wasn’t found of from both sides- and after all, the pursuit of capital and influence is not generally selfless. Let’s not be under any delusions about the fact that some of our partners are controlling billions of dollar’s worth of assets. In the words “Bill Gates” from that Simpson’s episode; “you didn’t think I got rich writing checks, did you?! Buy 'em out, boys!”

I would also like to see a request that Alameda facilitate and fund the creation of a staff fund, in order to hire individuals who would officially fulfill community-service duties to BitDAO holders.

1 Like

What percentage of voting power would that give Alameda as of now? BitDAO doesn’t need Alameda, it’s a mistake IMO. You’re inviting a rooster into the hen house, Alameda never takes a deal where they don’t have the edge. There are countless smart people and great projects all around us, and even more being built. I can go on and on why I think it’s a bad idea, but I’ll save the rant. Simply a HARD NO.

1 Like

I don’t see why BitDAO needs them for media coverage, you’re going to be the biggest DAO in the world. The DAO should have it’s own identity and branding.

1 Like

There’s also a discussion open on this proposal in the BitDAO Discord, in the #proposals channel.

1 Like

This does not prevent discussion in the forum, I think the forum is more suitable for discussion than discord, because the forum all people can directly view, more open

2 Likes

Respectfully, Discord is an open platform that’s browser accessible. It facilitates discussion in a way that the forums cannot.

1 Like

There are advantages and disadvantages to both. We can point people here to Discord and people in Discord to the forum. Good to see where members are more engaged.

2 Likes

BIP-4: Swap $BIT for $FTT (with Alameda Research) snapshot vote is successful and has been executed.

https://snapshot.org/#/bitdao.eth/proposal/QmXKDH8U54wHgKGUpeC3iR3UxF1ZQekADCQtM5crafnptF

Thank you to @ajm_alameda and @cateatpeanut for co-authoring the proposal, and all the BIT stakeholders who gave feedback and voted.

2 Likes