Things are looking a bit messy over at the Safe Ecosystem Foundation. Greenfield Capital, a major investor in the project, has officially filed a supervisory complaint with the Swiss Federal Supervisory Authority for Foundations (ESA). Basically, they’re asking the government to step in and fix the boardroom because, according to Greenfield, the current vibes are totally off and the project isn't reaching its potential.
The breakdown
In an open letter dropped this Sunday, Greenfield founding partner Jascha Samadi didn't hold back. After over a year of trying to play nice and talk things out, Greenfield claims they’ve been left with no choice but to alert the feds. The core of the drama? A major lack of independent voices on the board and some serious concerns about potential conflicts of interest. Specifically, Samadi called out board members Stefan George and Richard Meissner for their ties to Gnosis and other companies building on top of Safe.
Underperforming the market
It’s not just about office politics; Greenfield is looking at the receipts and they aren't happy. While the broader DeFi space has been pumping, Safe is struggling. According to the complaint, the total value held in Safe accounts plummeted from $66 billion to $30 billion between early 2024 and August 2026. That’s a 50% drop, while the rest of the DeFi market was up 40%.
Even with a goal to double revenue in 2026, their second-quarter revenue of $1.98 million puts them on an annualized run rate of $8 million—which is lowkey way off from the $20 million they were aiming for. Safe’s share of USDC in circulation has also cratered, falling from 12.8% to just 2.5%.
Greenfield wants to see the board restructured with experts who actually know finance and risk management. For now, they are letting the Swiss regulators decide if it’s time for a shake-up. Real talk: if this doesn't get sorted, the project’s long-term goal of $100 million in annual revenue by 2030 is looking like a tough climb.
Why it matters
This is a classic 'governance vs. decentralization' battle that could set a precedent for how crypto foundations are held accountable. Remember, this isn't financial advice—just a look at the on-chain reality of what happens when investors feel like a project's leadership is fumbling the bag.
