###### tags: `Mesa` `DXdao` `gnosis`

# strategy for gnosis, next step

So we are somewhat stuck with GnosisDAO. There are different paths now:

**Informal way**

Tell them that we are not ready for a deal right now and just work further in a informal way. The only risk this has, if we get a conflict having no agreement would make such a situation more difficult to resolve.

But: With gnosis, we have a pretty good understanding what our roles are and risk is limited for a conflict because we have a working relationship. 

Additional risk comes from GnosisDAO being a DAO which may go a different direction and other people get influence which are not part of the ongoing relationship.

**Make a counter offer on (token swap)** 

GnosisDAO want to do a token swap. The imbalance and the different tokenomics of the two DAOs is the main problem to solve. (See my last answer to Stefan in the chat)

The main thing about this: Chances are high that we end up in some form of junior partner because the different capitalization. They can make several large deals with different organization, and we can't.

Junior partnership risk looms too because GnosisDAO controlls the technically hard smart contract layer which is much harder to duplicate.

A token swap makes sens, if we think we want influence the development of GnosisDAO in a active way. We can for sure do that and would also have some soft power because our connection and experience being a much more executable ready DAO than GnosisDAO.

If we are doing this, we need somebody take over this task and manage this relationship and take an active role in the governance of GnosisDAO.

Getting as stash of GNO token and not use them for influence is a wasted opportunity.

**Make a counter offer without token swap (Sub-Dao)**

I made an adapted draft on Geronimos quick draft for an Omen Governance. Geronimos did it for Omen so I just addaptet this. But because mesa is in a reboot stage anyway it would make sens to do this for mesa first.

(This docoument is just a example how this could work, its has been written in 1-2h: https://hackmd.io/pKVQCIdOTjaT3Yw6_P5DHw)

Sub-daoing would fix several issues with the token swap and have additional benefits:

- This would solve the imbalance in size between DXdao and GnosisDAO by creating a new sub organization governed equal by DXdao and GnosisDAO
(This is how traditional company are handling this and it's an established way) 

- DXdao and GnosisDAO are at the same level
- We could try out the liquidity strategy IDO -> swapr -> win first pool
- Dogfooding Mesa IDO makes sens to restore confidence after the manipulation (Brand-Wise) and we would learn a lot from this.
- Having additional stakeholders GnosisDAO and DXdao a stalemate can't happen
- Additional outside exposure
- Tokenomics tailored to the product
- If we find a working model, we could apply this to other too.

Risk: 
- Additional complexity on governance and tech level

**Make the deal bigger**

As analyzed, get the same value on GnosisDAO as GnosisDAO on DXD will not work, as GnosisDAO is ~10x bigger than DXdao in capital terms. 

What we can, is request to make this deal bigger by asking for some exclusive areas as suggested by Christopher.  

Drawback about this is that we do such a deal limits us in further development. This would be no problem, if we had a strategic roadmap for the next view years and doing a deal in one of the corner stone of this strategic goal would make sens.  To my knowledge no such roadmap exists right now, so it's difficult for us to find a deal in this direction.

**My opinion**

Sub-Dao is my favorite path to explorer because it's the crypto way and makes sens on different level but has a deep impact on our organization.

Make the deal bigger would be my second choice, but I don't think we are ready for this. But anyway, I could draft such proposal, and we could discuss this internally. This may be a fruitful discussion for us, also to think in this direction. 

Token swap may be the option, if the two other are ruled out, but we can't do that if it adds to much imbalance between the DAOs.

I also could live with a no deal as said in the chat, but this may be a downer for our relationship with GnosisDAO and is not a good sign as we appear non-functional.