2025-12-25 04:26:36

Recently, a number has caught the attention of many token holders. According to the 2024 financial data of a leading DEX foundation, the total salary expenditure for the year reached $4.8 million, while the funds allocated during the same period were only $10 million. At first glance, this cost-to-output ratio is indeed quite striking.

Take the grant team of a certain Layer 2 ecosystem foundation as an example; their situation is completely different. Their personnel costs are $2.6 million, yet they manage a grant budget of $63.5 million. In other words, they spend less on human resources but allocate a much larger amount of funds.

Community members' questions are straightforward: the salaries of senior executives in the former case are equivalent to the entire cost of the latter's grant team, yet the funds allocated are only one-fifth of theirs. This naturally raises the question—are these funds being used efficiently? Does the foundation's operational efficiency need to be reconsidered?

This also leads to a broader topic. In DAO and on-chain ecosystem operations, how should fund efficiency be measured? Is there room for optimization in the relationship between human input and output? Token holders and governance participants are beginning to reevaluate these seemingly administrative details, which actually reflect genuine concerns about the health of the ecosystem.

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

18 Likes

Reward
18
9
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

NFTFreezer

· 12-28 04:26

A salary of 4.8 million only triggers a funding of 10 million, this efficiency is really outrageous, compared to their 63.5 million... --- It feels like some foundations are just burning money, what are high-level executives with sky-high salaries doing? --- When you compare these numbers, it’s hard not to see the truth. Not trying to blacken anyone, the facts are right here. --- They spend 2.6 million to accomplish a task worth 63.5 million, while you spend 4.8 million for only 10 million? This logic really doesn’t add up. --- Starting to doubt whether some foundations truly want to build an ecosystem or just want to keep people employed... --- With such low funding efficiency, why shouldn’t token holders question it? It’s time for an investigation. --- I just want to know where that 4.8 million salary went; someone needs to come out and explain. --- The contrast is too stark; over at L2, they really got things figured out. --- That’s why I’m increasingly indifferent to some "big foundations"; their efficiency is just terrible. --- The utilization rate of funds is right here, there’s nothing to argue about.

View OriginalReply0

WalletDivorcer

· 12-27 23:22

$4.8 million salary only allocated $10 million? This ratio is outrageous, anyone would be offended. Their second-tier ecosystem costs 2.6 million with a budget of 63.5 million, now that's managing finances properly. Comparing it makes me genuinely exhausted. Executive compensation equals the entire team’s cost, but the output is only one-fifth? I just can't understand this logic. That's why I don't trust centralized foundations; they take the big head's share while small investors get the leftovers. Spending money like this, no wonder the community complains every day. Instead of reflecting, just conduct an audit.

View OriginalReply0

LiquidatedDreams

· 12-25 07:47

Only 10 million out of 4.8 million in salary is allocated, this ratio is really outrageous. It's better to just burn it directly.

View OriginalReply0

MidnightGenesis

· 12-25 04:55

On-chain data shows that this comparison is indeed outrageous... 4.8 million in salary only gets 10 million in funding, which doesn't add up according to the code logic.

View OriginalReply0

0xSoulless

· 12-25 04:55

4.8 million salary with 10 million funding? That's outrageous, the executives really know how to do the math It's that time of year again for the foundation's "self-assessment," and the retail investors are finally starting to smell something Really? Spending so much money and only allocating this much? How did the second tier manage to reach over 60 million? Teach me This is what they call "ecological construction," I laughed How many foundations truly care about efficiency? They're all just waiting for the market to rise so they can get by

View OriginalReply0

RegenRestorer

· 12-25 04:51

A salary of 4.8 million with only 10 million in funding—how idle must they be? --- Over on the second layer, a 2.6 million salary can mobilize 63.5 million in funds. Comparing the two is truly outrageous. --- Oh my, can the DEX Foundation's efficiency be seen? Was my money just given for free? --- Another story of a big foundation supporting idlers—boring. --- Wait, can manpower costs and funding efficiency really be compared like this? Feels like a trap. --- Holders' money is just being squandered like this, haha. --- So who is actually working seriously? These numbers say everything. --- Regarding funding efficiency, someone really needs to oversee the foundation. --- Can't help but complain; this gap really explains a lot. --- The foundation has high salaries and low funding—how did this model become mainstream?

View OriginalReply0

SchroedingerGas

· 12-25 04:50

4.8 million in salary only allocated 10 million, this ratio is truly outrageous, with labor costs almost accounting for half. How does the second layer manage to handle over 60 million with only 2.6 million? Where is the problem that causes such a huge gap? So the foundation is just a big propaganda tool? The real money all goes to the executives. If this kind of efficiency were in a traditional company, the board of directors would have ousted them long ago. But in a DAO, no one seems to be in charge?

View OriginalReply0

RunWithRugs

· 12-25 04:44

4.8 million in salary is allocated from 10 million? That ratio is indeed outrageous. Why not just go learn from the Layer 2 ecosystem directly?

View OriginalReply0

OnlyUpOnly

· 12-25 04:35

4.8 million in salary paired with 10 million in funding? The data is so outrageous, it feels like money-burning fun. --- Just compare, they achieve the same work with a 2.6 million cost, leveraging over 60 million. The scale difference is huge. --- It's the old routine of foundations eating and drinking, communities footing the bill. When will we see real efficiency? --- If this ratio continues, foundations will eventually be voted out by DAO votes, and the market will eliminate bad operations. --- I just want to know how much of this 4.8 million flows into certain people's private accounts. It's too suspicious. --- No wonder the ecosystem isn't making progress; the money is all eaten up by executives. I would vote against it. --- That's why I only trust autonomous treasuries, not the centralized foundation model.

View OriginalReply0