If it’s only 300,000, why is it so important that you get it from us? This amount should be for Mfam, so leave it with us if it’s almost nothing.
1 Like
Treasury Fund Usage from Deprecated Aera V2 Apollo Vault just don’t lump us all together
Otherwise, I agree that the ratio is up for discussion and must be more realistic, with a premium for a 12-month gradual lock. Of course, this will also affect Well, so the other side must also agree to it, so this should be either from the vault, but it is still fairest to leave Mfam to compensate Mfam for these funds. Or, if it helps to build trust, ok, buy cbeth for it and, according to the proposal, let’s also settle Mfam according to Fechuka_25’s proposal. In any case, compensation should be for stakers until, say, January 2026, in order to eliminate speculators.
as hodler of both mfam and well, i support the ratio and also the treasury use to repay cbETH…and again mfam treasury is way bigger than 300k
most important to act fast, cbETH is volatile asset 
users want their cbETH back asap
1 Like
look even without the cbeth incident or the immediately use of the mfam treasury, i guarantee you there would have been some kind of apollo onboarding and mfam->well conversion 
Well holders were treated very well, ratio is just fair
1 Like
Ofc you support the ratio bc you want 1.5 for 1 lol
ratio has to be money divided by current amount that’s the only fair compensation way.
13.5/1 is the real ratio I’ll be fine with 12/1
Anyone who left MFAM was leaving it for dust fyi
i support it bc it is fair…even 1:2 would be fair…I doubt that more than 40% of MFAM holders will claim it…so do the math again…
and the mfam treasury is 600k+
if it doesn’t pass I’m almost sure the MF has to sell well tokens to cover the first batch of cbETH repayment, and then likely again and again…and that would not end well
be smart and support the proposal, even if you not direct benefit from it, but your well bag benefits a lot
1 Like
You’re literally saying, the people who lost their money (that are not at fault), don’t deserve the same treatment as the people holding Moonwell, MFAM?
It’s like hey, I know you just lost your money in Moonwell who you trusted, but now after this if you don’t hold our token, or buy you can take a hike.
Moonwell is Moonwell, we are Moonwell. No one should benefit from this. Evenly distributed, fair. I just want my assets back as do you
3 Likes
ah no no I think you get it wrong…imo he was answering to like the only $well holder that didn’t support the proposal…don’t take it to serious..its really just one
every other, supports the proposal and the message is clear, cbETH repayment asap…don’t worry they support the proposal…I hope the proposal goes live today
1 Like
Hey, I’d like to clarify a few important points regarding the proposal to avoid any confusion:
First, the snapshot will be taken at the exact time the forum post was created. This ensures fairness and prevents any potential gaming after the proposal became public.
Second, the intent is to provide compensation equal to 1.5× the USD value of MFAM, calculated based on market cap. This is not a fixed MFAM-to-stkWELL token ratio. The final conversion will be determined by USD value, not by applying a static token exchange rate.
Finally, the conversion will take into account both MFAM held directly in wallets and staked MFAM (stkMFAM). It is not limited to stkMFAM only. All eligible holdings at the time of the snapshot will be included in the calculation.
It’s great to see the different perspectives, and I appreciate all the feedback.
4 Likes
We don’t want USD back. We want our assets. By the time I get all my USD, assets could be double the value of fair market value at time of liquidation.
Why would any of us want anything other than what we lost. Capturing the value of assets at time of liquidation in 12 months now will be messed up either way. Regardless we are trapped, I would just rather get paid in the amount of the assets I lost
2 Likes
I completely agree with this, I lost my cbETH and would like to receive that same cbETH and other assets back. Perhaps you could speak to Coinbase to get a bridge loan or something? Ironically I chose cbETH as thought it to be a safe option…
1 Like
Even if the repayments are made in installments based on the USD equivalent at the time of the incident, it will not lead to full recovery of the losses. Since all collateral assets (not just cbETH) were liquidated in a chain reaction, I believe the affected collateral should be fully refunded in its original form or equivalent.
You could have told us that much earlier; the first questions were precisely about the ratio (3 days ago)…and the proposal doesn’t mention a single word about the MFAM USD value…. do you want to confuse us?
And how can we have a discussion if all the information is missing?
Please share your snapshot details, prices, and a suitable example with us.
or we go back to this proposal Treasury Fund Usage from Deprecated Aera V2 Apollo Vault - #23 by amonss
the MFAm treasury has 600k+$ (usdc,frax,Movr,ksm) , Give a fair ratio to the mfam holders and use that money asap to repay cbETH users..
Sorry, but it really feels like this is intentional. Were you hoping for a crypto crash ? idk, you could have answered question a lot earlier…
2 Likes
This is very sad, so this proposal to us long-term Mfam holders from the profits on the network, say 300,000, you will give us 25,000 and for a period of 12 months, that’s a good joke. Let me give you an example: I invested $25,000 in Mfam, and the current price is $1,000 from the profit and the rest of the network, which is about $400,000, $1,500, and still locked for 12 months, so that’s a joke. Am I understanding this correctly? The main thing is that you patch up at least some of the problems of another network. And even now, I can’t get to the frozen Mfalum on Moonwell, great.
Will Mfam vote, I hope? So Luke will easily outvote us because he has the majority of the stable, right?
The all-time high was 0.3, so let’s set the calculation price at 0.01 for 12 months.
Well, not so much 0.001 * 1.5 with a 12-month lock-up haha crypto is a joke
Yes, this is starting to feel shady
I support this proposal moving forward and appreciate the work that went into the onchain reconstruction of losses and the overall recovery framework.
One area worth revisiting before the final vote is the repayment denomination. Calculating losses in USD and repaying accordingly is straightforward, but it locks affected borrowers into the ETH price at the time of the incident. Given that repayments will stretch over months, any appreciation in ETH value during that period would leave borrowers whole on paper but short in practice.
It may be worth exploring two options:
- Repaying in ETH quantity rather than USD value.
- Giving borrowers the choice between the two, since different users will have different preferences.
Neither option needs to complicate the broader proposal. I raise it simply because getting this detail right would go a long way in building confidence among affected users and the wider community.
2 Likes