Aave’s $140 million revenue year is overshadowed by a failed brand audit vote, a $10 million AAVE purchase, and a brutal governance breach that is putting pressure on the token.
Summary
- DAO revenues reached $140 million this year, more than the previous three years combined, with AAVE holders in control of the funds.
- A brand asset transfer proposal failed with 55% opposed and 41% abstaining, further widening the rift between Aave Labs and the DAO.
- AAVE’s price has fallen about 20% due to criticism of Kulechov’s token purchase of more than $10 million and concerns about governance attacks and fee routing.
Aave’s Christmas boardroom drama has turned into an open confrontation, with founder Stani Kulechov now insisting that DAO revenues were roughly $140 million this year – more than the previous three years combined – and insisting that his multimillion-dollar AAVE (AAVE) purchase was never used to influence the tie-breaking vote for brand control that just failed.
AAVE Dao vs. AAVE Labs continues
Over Christmas week, with most agencies in Paris and London down to skeleton crews and DeFi volumes thinned out, Aave’s governance channels turned into a full-blown street battle over who actually controls the protocol’s name, domains, and soft IP. The clash culminated in the rejection of an Aave Request for Comment (ARFC) to transfer core Aave Labs brand assets to the DAO, with more than 55% of votes opposed and more than 41% of participants simply refusing to take sides.
In a new statement about X, Aave founder and CEO Stani Kulechov attempted to reset the narrative. “I am committed to clarifying the economic interests between Aave Labs and $AAVE token holders,” he wrote, admitting that “our explanation in this regard was not sufficient, and we will strive to improve in the future.” He underscored what he called the missing context in the uproar: “The DAO has generated $140 million in revenue this year, surpassing the total revenue of the past three years, and $AAVE token holders have control over these funds.”
This reminder landed in a market that was busy pricing in governance risks. Over the past week, AAVE (AAVE) has dumped about 20%, from the high $180s to the mid-$140s, with the intraday range showing a sharp decline from $5 to $7 as liquidity thins out above $155 and aggressive sellers continue to lean on any rebound. One whale moved more than 230,000 AAVE – roughly $37 million at the time – in a single sell, sending the price down to almost $162 and leaving a very clear supply overhang on the daily chart that traders now view as de facto resistance.
At the heart of the dispute is Kulechov’s recent purchase of approximately $10-15 million worth of AAVE tokens, executed on an order book that was already jittery and heavily skewed toward perpetuals rather than spot. Critics called it a “governance attack,” arguing that the timing allowed the founder to increase his voting power just before a controversial set of votes on brand control and revenue routing went to Snapshot. Kulechov pushed back hard on that framework, bluntly stating that “these tokens were not used to vote on the recent proposal; that was never my intention,” adding, “This is my lifelong career and I support my beliefs with my own money.”
The ARFC on the transfer of brand assets, which would have brought Aave’s domains, trademarks and social channels into a DAO-controlled legal package, became a lightning rod. Board stewards and at-large delegates labeled the timing of the holiday a “hostile” move, noting that the vote was pushed through a period of low participation when many institutional token holders and protocol-aligned market makers were effectively offline. The final result – 994,800 votes against, only 63,000 in favor and a massive abstention bloc – revealed a deep division between Aave Labs and the DAO over how quickly and to what extent the protocol should drive the decentralization of off-chain assets.
Beneath the surface, this is also about cash flows and interface economics, not just logos and Twitter handles. Community members have accused the recent front-end changes of diverting swap-related revenue away from the DAO, fueling a narrative that core development is quietly tightening its grip just as real asset volumes and fee income are starting to scale. Against that backdrop, Kulechov’s emphasis on the DAO’s $140 million annual revenue feels less like abstract accounting and more like a reminder that the on-chain coffers—not the branded packaging—are the actual power at the moment.
The markets trade it with the subtlety of a sledgehammer. Funding has turned negative for several AAVE-perp pairs after Monday’s low was hit and failed to hold, with midcap DeFi names getting a bid while AAVE itself remained stuck below previous local support, a classic “problem child” setup that agencies in Paris and Zug have seen a hundred times in board blowups. Ignore the noise and you still get a blunt picture: this rally dies once the second AAVE slides cleanly below the $140-$142 pocket where spot demand last appeared; below that, it’s pure exit liquidity until the board settles down or a bigger player decides the discount justifies the intervention.
For his part, Kulechov now promises a clearer roadmap. “Going forward, we will more clearly articulate how the products developed by Aave Labs create value for DAO and $AAVE token holders,” he said, indicating that the next phase of communications will focus on a closer alignment between core development and tokenholder economics rather than hasty voting during holiday periods. Yet, after a week of accusations, failed proposals and a double-digit loss, the burden of proof has shifted; Aave’s governance experiment is now in the spotlight and the market is watching the next Snapshot like a hawk.
