Safe backer Greenfield asks Swiss watchdog to examine a foundation board that at times had two members
Greenfield Capital asked Switzerland's foundation watchdog to examine Safe's Zug foundation, whose board it says has at times had only two members. The early backer wants Stefan George replaced and independent directors added after months of talks failed.
The Investor · Invest desk
What happened
- Board member Stefan George is also chief technology officer of Gnosis, the company Safe spun off from in 2022, and Gnosis sells wallet products that compete with Safe.
- After the February 2025 Bybit hack, claims surfaced that George and a Gnosis co-founder pressed Safe's founders to reallocate SAFE tokens under threat of selling Gnosis's roughly 10% stake; no authority has tested them.
- In February, Safe reported more than $10 million of annualized revenue for the end of 2025 and set 2026 targets of break-even and doubled revenue.
- Greenfield says Safe's share of USDC in circulation fell from 12.8% to 2.5%, and stablecoins in Safes on Ethereum grew 11% while total supply grew about 135%.
- Greenfield invested in Safe's 2022 financing round, says it has never sold a SAFE token, and says it will not sue individuals or try to take control.
Why it matters
- What doesn't add up contradiction Anyone citing Safe's decline in dollars has to choose between two published versions a factor of ten apart, though the roughly 55% fall holds under either one.
- What it limits constraint Having ruled out selling its tokens, suing anyone or taking control, Greenfield has left itself the supervisor and public argument as its only stated means of changing the board.
- Who has to decide decision A strategy committee without decision power did not satisfy Greenfield, so the directors now choose between recruiting outsiders themselves and defending the current board to a supervisor.
- Who's exposed exposure Gnosis's link to Safe, through its CTO's board seat and its competing wallets, is now part of a dispute before a federal supervisor that neither company controls.
Next story · Invest · 9h ago
After USDC partners, transaction costs and operations, Circle keeps about 7 cents of each revenue dollarConfirmed3 publishers
Greenfield's revenue case starts from one quarter. By its count, second-quarter revenue was $1.98 million [15], and four quarters at that pace come to $7.9 million [18]. That is at least a fifth below the annualized figure Safe itself reported for the end of 2025 [19]. It is also $12 million short of the $20 million Greenfield says 2026 was meant to deliver, so the run rate covers 40% of the expectation [20].
The asset numbers are less tidy. Crypto Briefing reports that assets held in Safe fell from about $6.6 billion in early 2024 to around $3 billion [21]. Cointelegraph quotes Samadi putting the January 2024 to August 2026 move at $66 billion to $30 billion [22]. The two versions are a factor of ten apart. Under either one the fall is about 55% [23], over a period in which DeFi total value locked rose 40% [22]. In the open letter, Samadi wrote: "In the category that has grown the most and that self-custody infrastructure is best placed to serve, Safe has been losing ground for two and a half years." [13]
Greenfield says it spent months working with the foundation directly before filing [3]. Beyond board seats, it wanted a full review of strategy, product, organization and tokenomics, tied to measurable KPIs [8]. The foundation set up a strategy committee with no decision-making power and filled board seats that were already vacant [10]. Samadi then published an open letter to the Safe community on Sunday [7]. "But we have come to believe, after more than a year of research, dialogue and patience, that Safe will not reach its potential under its current governance," Samadi said [16]. The complaint asks the ESA to examine the foundation's governance and decide whether corrective measures are needed [9]. Neither report describes a SafeDAO vote on who sits on the board of the Zug foundation that oversees the DAO's treasury [2], or says whether SAFE holders have one.
I think the complaint's strongest count is the statutory one, or rather the narrow piece of it about board size [11]. A count of directors is something a supervisor can check against the foundation's rules. The counter-case is that the foundation has since filled its vacancies [10], so the board-size count may describe a problem already fixed. The conflict claims turn on judgment and are harder for a supervisor to rule on: they concern George's Gnosis role and Richard Meissner's ties to companies that develop and operate Safe products [5]. If the ESA [1] accepts a filled board as enough, then the view that a supervisory complaint gives a token investor real leverage over a Zug foundation is wrong.
What to watch
- A SafeDAO governance proposal on the foundation board would show whether SAFE holders have a route to the directors other than a complaint.
- Any public answer from Stefan George or Gnosis to the conflict and token-reallocation claims.
- Safe's third-quarter revenue: a quarter near $5 million would put the $20 million goal back in reach and weaken Greenfield's main performance argument.
Information, not investment advice. This story is general information about companies and markets, drawn from cited reporting. It is not a recommendation to buy, sell or hold any security; check the cited sources before acting.
Clarity's read
What the record supports and how the coverage leans. The claims behind it follow.
Reality
- Evidence45
- Adoption30
- Hype gap+20
- Incentives75
- Confidence45
Claim ledger
Ranked by verification strength, evidence, and original report placement.
- [1]
Greenfield Capital, an early investor in Safe, filed a formal complaint with Switzerland's Federal Supervisory Authority for Foundations (ESA).
- [2]
The complaint targets governance at the Safe Ecosystem Foundation, the Zug-based non-profit that oversees SafeDAO and its treasury.
- [3]
According to Greenfield, the complaint came only after months of trying to work things out with the foundation directly.
- [4]
Board member Stefan George is also the CTO of Gnosis. Safe spun off from Gnosis in 2022. Gnosis offers wallet products that compete with Safe.
- [5]
Samadi alleged conflicts of interest involving board member Stefan George's role at Gnosis and fellow board member Richard Meissner's ties to companies developing and operating Safe products.
- [6]
Greenfield said it had spent months asking the foundation to restructure its governance, replacing George and expanding the board with independent, externally recruited members with expertise in finance, risk management and business strategy.
- [7]
Greenfield founding partner Jascha Samadi published an open letter to the Safe community on Sunday.
- [8]
Greenfield wanted a full review of Safe's strategy, product, organization and tokenomics, with measurable KPIs so progress could be tracked.
- [9]
Greenfield is asking the Swiss watchdog to examine the foundation's governance and determine whether corrective measures are needed.
- [10]
The foundation's answer fell short of Greenfield's requests: it set up a strategy committee with no decision-making power and filled existing board vacancies.
- [11]
Greenfield's complaint points to what it describes as statutory shortfalls; at times, according to the allegations, the foundation's board has had only two members.
- [12]
Over the same period, total stablecoin supply grew roughly 135%, while stablecoins held in Safes on Ethereum grew only 11%, and Safe's share of USDC in circulation fell from 12.8% to 2.5%.
- [13]
"In the category that has grown the most and that self-custody infrastructure is best placed to serve, Safe has been losing ground for two and a half years."
- [14]
Safe is targeting break-even and a doubling of revenue in 2026. In a February announcement it reported more than $10 million in project-wide annualized revenue at the end of 2025 and an ambition to reach $100 million in annual recurring revenue by 2030.
- [15]
Greenfield pointed to $1.98 million in second-quarter revenue, equivalent to an annualized run rate of $8 million, as far below the $20 million expectation for 2026.
- [16]
"But we have come to believe, after more than a year of research, dialogue and patience, that Safe will not reach its potential under its current governance," Samadi said.
- [17]
Greenfield came in during Safe's 2022 financing round, says it has kept 100% of its SAFE tokens and never sold any, and says it does not intend to sue any individuals or take control of Safe.
- [18]
Four quarters at Greenfield's second-quarter revenue figure come to about $7.9 million.
- [19]
Greenfield's $8 million run rate is at least a fifth below the more than $10 million of annualized revenue Safe reported for the end of 2025.
- [20]
The $8 million run rate is $12 million short of the $20 million 2026 expectation and covers 40% of it.
- [21]
Assets held in Safe fell from approximately $6.6 billion in early 2024 to around $3 billion now; over the same broad period DeFi total value locked rose around 40% and stablecoin supply expanded roughly 135%.
- [22]
Samadi said between January 2024 and August 2026 total value held in Safe accounts fell from $66 billion to $30 billion, declining more than 50%, while total DeFi total value locked grew 40%.
- [23]
The two published versions of Safe's asset decline differ by a factor of ten, but both imply a fall of about 55%.
- [24]
Following the Bybit hack in February 2025, claims surfaced that George and a Gnosis co-founder pressured Safe's co-founders to reallocate a significant amount of SAFE tokens, with the alleged threat that Gnosis would sell its stake of approximately 10% in the company. These remain allegations and have not been tested by any authority.
Sources
2 independent publishers whose own reporting we read for this story.
- cointelegraph.comSafe investor asks Swiss watchdog to intervene in governance dispute
1 article · October 4, 2026
- cryptobriefing.comGreenfield Capital takes Safe Ecosystem governance fight to Swiss regulator
1 article · October 4, 2026
Topics and entities
Topics
- DAO Governance
- Crypto self-custody
- Swiss foundation supervision