This proposal seeks to allocate DAO treasury assets ($3M at the time of writing) to buy back OGN from the open market and distribute it to xOGN holders within one year. In the first 90 days of protocol revenue being distributed to OGN stakers, $1 million of OGN will be bought back using DAO assets and protocol revenue.
This proposal builds on the momentum of the protocol revenue buyback proposal and marks a strategic shift in how DAO assets are utilized—from accumulating assets to actively deploying them for token holder value.
By allocating the DAO’s capital to OGN buybacks, we aim to accelerate the value accrual flywheel for OGN, reward long-term stakers, and increase the benefits of holding and staking OGN.
Motivation
Over the past year, Origin has launched superior yield products across multiple networks. These products now generate meaningful revenue, and 100% of that revenue will be used to buy and distribute OGN via Origin’s improved buyback mechanism.
However, the DAO also holds a sizable treasury—over $3 million in protocol revenue and other liquid assets. This proposal unlocks that value by directing these funds to buy OGN and reward stakers.
Implementation
OGN buybacks will commence by July 4th, 2025, coinciding with protocol revenue distributions to OGN stakers. During week one, an estimated 3.9 million OGN will be distributed to stakers—$100,000 from buybacks and over 1.3M OGN already held by the DAO. Early stakers will be first in line.
Amount: Approximately $3.141M worth of DAO assets at the time of writing.
Mechanism: The Buyback Operator (a new Safe Smart Account) will swap DAO assets into OUSD or OETH for yield and stability, and then begin OGN buybacks by July 4th, 2025.
Distribution: All purchased OGN will be distributed to OGN stakers to increase staking APYs.
Transparency: All asset sales and OGN buybacks will be conducted by the Buyback Operator, with updates posted on Discord and X.
Note: The US dollar figures in this proposal reflect market rates at the time of writing but are subject to market volatility. See the breakdown of assets held on our Protocol NAV dashboard.
Expected Outcomes
Increased demand for OGN due to market buys
Higher staking yields for xOGN holders (no new emissions)
Simpler value proposition for token holders and new users: “Stake OGN, earn rewards from protocol revenue and DAO asset distributions”
Next Steps
If this proposal passes, execution will begin in tandem with the protocol revenue buybacks proposal, coordinated by the Buyback Operator and tracked publicly. The xOGN staking contract is already set up to receive and distribute purchased OGN.
Given the buybacks will happen over time, and a MORPHO balance would be maintained for many months, there is no reason the MORPHO cannot be delegated for months as it is being sold and emitted. In fact, this is strictly more yield for xOGN holders.
To be clear, the xOGN holders voted to pass the community-created EH proposal. Throughout the community-supported proposal, certain Origin team members pushed back. Despite this the proposals passed with community support. The team then ignored the community vote for a month and put up a team created counter proposal canceling the community proposal. (With a weak citing of security review for a single line delegation function on the MORPHO contract itself. NOTE this can be done directly from Morpho’s own website: https://delegate.morpho.org/ )
Can we confirm: one of the core price values of OGN is its governance capacity? The team ignored this value, then nullified the community vote. If so, can we assume a repricing of valuation stripping governance value?
I think you missed one essential part of the proposal:
Mechanism: The Buyback Operator (a new Safe Smart Account) will swap DAO assets into OUSD or OETH for yield and stability, and then begin OGN buybacks by July 4th, 2025.
While the buybacks will occur over time, the swap of assets into OUSD or OETH will happen relatively quickly, not in months but in weeks. What’s the added value of having this delegation for less than a month to xOGN holders? Can you give an actual number? Remember that whatever you give us should be a liquid asset that can be sold instantly in the open market.
Are you talking about me when you mention “certain Origin team members pushed back”? I think I was very clear with you on why I voted no on the proposal, which was that it felt like a distraction rather than adding value to xOGN holders.
We didn’t have any time to review the MORPHO contracts and assess their implications for the delegation.
Your last paragraph seems unnecessary, and the tone is unappreciated.
There was a full proposal, published and passed, by the (your) community on this. Feel free to read it to understand the details. However, the emitted asset was to be OP or USDC. About as liquid as it could be.
Not naming you was a courtesy to you should you not wanted to have been named. But, yes, you deemed the community’s choice a distraction (to your preference). Regardless, you carried that personal opinion, which the community clearly did not share, into your decision making of what is ‘worth’ doing. e.g. not reviewing a singular signature. But, I’m not sure the point you’re making here.
If an imagined “tone” was all you took from your own DAO token being used by the community to pass a proposal which was then ignored and replaced by your internal team proposal, then ironically the issues I’m highlighting are only further evident.
Regardless, as a genuine point of advise, if the team wanted to abstain from voting to at minimum preserve the idea that the community has a say, that might help you retain the notion that xOGN holders have a say in governance. Alternatively, just take the reins overtly and make xOGN a rev share, non-gov token.
Anyway, best of luck to you and the Origin team. We have no further interest in working in this ecosystem.