Morpho’s FDV has already reached 70% of Aave’s total FDV. Market capitalization is one of the ways potential clients assess a protocol’s value, and it also serves as a form of brand equity. Therefore, effective market cap management is crucially important.thanks
1 Like
Don’t forget: Morpho’s off-chain assets (IP, brand, etc.) are held in a shareholder-free entity. AAVE’s assets? Still held hostage by Labs.
That’s likely why Morpho’s token appreciates while AAVE only offers “voting rights” in a rigged system where Labs exploits its leverage for private benefit. Welcome to DeFi 1.0.
5 Likes
I have been quietly observing the discussions here for about a month. No matter the topic, or where the debate begins, we inevitably circle back to the same bottleneck: Aave Labs and Stani.
Let’s look at the process objectively. Aave Labs appears to be drafting the upcoming proposal in total isolation without engaging the DAO, key partners, or community leaders. How can they possibly expect a proposal crafted behind closed doors, ignoring the very stakeholders it affects, to be accepted? A proposal cooked up in a “silo” is usually a recipe for failure.
While we are busy theorizing about “strategic partnerships” and “governance norms,” we are ignoring the fundamental power dynamic at the table. Why would Stani, who secured control of the brand years ago through the DAO’s goodwill and trust, voluntarily hand it back today?
In the current landscape, the Aave DAO functions merely as a passive “funding vehicle” for Labs. While our own sovereignty is effectively held hostage, we continue to tolerate and fund proposals that strictly serve Labs’ roadmap (such as V4 development).
Let’s not forget: sometimes, when a limb is gangrenous, you have to amputate it before the infection spreads to the whole body.
We must stop waiting for a “benevolent” offer that will never come. If we do not shift the power dynamic before they present their terms, we are not negotiating; we are submitting.
10 Likes
I already moved on from the vision that aave will win the lending market. From now on I will hold aave and morpho marketcap weighted. I don’t care which one wins anymore but I don’t like AAVE’s chances at this rate…
Aavelabs behavior of late reminds me of the phrase “snatching defeat from the jaws of victory”. Still total radio silence on this, gaslighting and alienating the SPs that have been paramount in the building of aave.
1 Like
Lets fix this problem together. Here’s a proposal that addresses our concerns [TEMP CHECK] Aave Service Provider & Orbit Delegate Revenue Alignment Framework feel free you chime in and comment
4 Likes
Reading through these comments, I can’t help but feel we are treating the symptoms rather than the root cause.
We often critique Service Providers (like Labs or Risk teams) for being too dominant or opaque. But we need a moment of collective introspection.
On one side of the table, we have entities that operate like agile tech companies: daily stand-ups, unified CEOs, and instant execution. On our side (the DAO), we have a structure designed for a slower era asynchronous forum posts, 10-day voting cycles, and fragmented coordination.
There is a massive “Coordination Asymmetry” here.
I have a genuine question for our Community Leaders and Top Delegates:
Are we structurally capable of sitting at the negotiation table as an equal peer right now?
It feels like the DAO is constantly in “reaction mode” because we lack an internal mechanism to align strategy before things hit the public forum. While Service Providers act, the DAO discusses.
Maybe it’s time to stop asking “What are the Service Providers doing wrong?” and start asking “What is missing in our own architecture that prevents us from being faster and more defensive?”
If we don’t upgrade our own decision-making engine to match the speed of the entities we hire, we will always remain a “Customer” rather than an “Owner.”
2 Likes
Your intentions are exceptional, but we’re facing a fundamental problem: we’re hostages to an entity that’s supposed to be the most responsible, trusted party acting on behalf of the DAO—but is clearly acting against it while receiving DAO funds.
Stani has erased over $1 billion in FDV. In TradFi, he would’ve been removed long ago. Yet here he is, still lecturing us about “how DAOs should work” and why we shouldn’t adopt social contracts—of course, because those contracts would limit his mercenary ambitions. We need to focus on one critical objective: establishing boundaries on Labs’ actions.
While I write this message, Sky is about to overtake AAVE’s market cap position. This should be a WAKE UP CALL to every single AAVE token holder.
Do we want to win or not?
5 Likes
Stani buying $30million dollar mansion and $AAVE plummeting to 92$ was not on my bingo card for 2026. Doesn’t look like winning to me or the community. AAVE does wonderful, $AAVE just seems useless at this point. Really hoping for things to change. Gratz on the mansion tough.
I fully share your sentiment. A verifiable, transparent structure is a non-negotiable necessity. Make no mistake, Stani and Labs are reading every word written here. Yet, notice how they only break their silence or react when their bottom line is threatened or when there is an opportunity to extract more value from the system.
However, I must address a critical contradiction regarding the leadership’s approach. Back in January, during the initial discussions to transfer the IP and brand to Labs, Stani acquired approximately $10M worth of AAVE. At that time, he explicitly stated on X that he would not use those tokens to influence the vote.
So I have to ask publicly why those tokens are now being deployed or leveraged in this current proposal regarding Mandatory Disclosures and Conflict of Interest. If the intention was truly neutrality, why use that purchasing power now to block or influence a proposal designed to bring transparency to the DAO? In a healthy governance system, leadership should welcome disclosure norms rather than waging a war against the community using the very tokens they claimed would remain neutral.
We are not against anyone making a profit as DeFi is about prosperity for all, but this must be achieved through fairness and transparency, not by leveraging capital to bypass the will of the DAO.
Furthermore, once we settle this proposal, we must immediately pivot to solving our execution speed. Labs constantly uses the argument that the DAO is too slow to justify bypassing us and maintaining their monopoly. We need to strip them of that argument by optimizing our own decision-making architecture so they have no excuses left to hide behind.
2 Likes
BlackRock has recently acquired the UNI token, precisely because it recognizes Uniswap’s well-defined governance structure and interest alignment mechanism, and has integrated BUIDL-related products into the Uniswap ecosystem.
This sends a clear lesson: if the governance and incentive structure of Aave is not properly clarified, institutional investors will not invest in the AAVE token, and it is highly unlikely that they will inject assets into the Aave protocol.
For a more expansive future, we should accelerate the rollout of plans to align governance and interests. The future of DeFi requires institutional participation; it can no longer be sustained by crypto-native capital alone.thanks
1 Like
It has been almost 6 weeks since @stani @AaveLabs shared this update
Could we get a clear ETA for the final proposal draft regarding IP and ownership?
Is Aave Labs planning to release it in connection with V4 going live, or once V4 is confirmed as ready for launch?
Some clarification on the timeline would be greatly appreciated
2 Likes
From the moment the IP and Brand discussions began, I have liquidated my entire AAVE position. My faith in the current state of this protocol is zero.
Let’s be brutally honest: The narrative of “decentralization” here is currently a fairy tale. As long as Aave Labs and Stani maintain this chokehold, Aave is neither a decentralized entity nor an objective one. We are witnessing voting manipulation and the open hijacking of the protocol’s identity.
I want to leave this statement for the record, to be looked back upon in history:
Unless the DAO and its community organize systematically and structurally to decouple from the dominance of Stani and Labs, Aave will inevitably lose its market leadership. The current governance rot is unsustainable.
And one final word to Stani: Starting the race well means nothing. What matters and what history remembers is how you finish it.
2 Likes
This is something the SEC will be happy to inquire into. We are still blind to who’s behind these wallets:
0x2764f4F458f5B2d44Cc817468777F665e1261FAa
.
0x58dDfB3Db792d2f8E2cdd5ba9726e6b932a3f5aF
∙ 0xdC0990910F47aD479020eD77B0d62BF738C2791a
∙ 0xEA0C12Fd29c3fe5B1ecC82a42702196bd0De6B5A
We need transparency NOW. We all know that Labs and Stani control these wallets, let’s remove the band-aid asap and move on.
1 Like
Aave token price January 2nd- $165
Aave token price February 11th -$105.
If this is winning I would hate to see losing.
Dissatisfied with how the current status quo represents your interests? You aren’t alone in the trenches. I’m stepping up as an independent Delegate to ask the hard questions and fight for true value accrual to the AAVE token.
2 Likes