An early backer of the self-custody infrastructure project Safe has asked Switzerland’s foundation supervisor to examine the board of the entity that oversees the ecosystem, after private talks failed to produce the governance changes it sought.
Greenfield Capital said this week that it submitted a supervisory complaint, known in German as an Aufsichtsanzeige, to the Federal Supervisory Authority for Foundations (ESA).
The filing concerns the Safe Ecosystem Foundation, a Zug-based nonprofit created in 2022 when Safe separated from Gnosis.
The foundation supervises SafeDAO and holds a substantial portion of the project’s treasury.
Greenfield published an open letter to the community at the same time, arguing that token holders should see the reasoning behind the escalation.
The firm invested in the financing round that accompanied the spin-off and says it still holds its entire SAFE allocation, having never sold any tokens.
Founding partner Jascha Samadi wrote that concern had been building since early 2025, first over relative performance and communication, then over accountability.
After the February 2025 Bybit incident—the largest theft in crypto history, linked to a compromised environment at the company that operated a widely used Safe wallet and maintained core protocol software—the investor concluded it could not rely on information from the team alone.
Through the second half of 2025 it conducted its own review, speaking with former staff, large users, ecosystem developers and other stakeholders.
That review, summarized for leadership in a December 2025 deck, pointed to a board that then had only two members and no independent directors; decisions on costs and initiatives taken with limited transparency; and product and commercial gaps, including complex user experience and weak engagement with institutional treasuries.
Greenfield also flagged what it described as a structural conflict: board member Stefan George is a co-founder and chief technology officer of Gnosis, which has offered wallet products that compete with Safe.
A second board member, Richard Meissner, has ties to companies that develop and operate Safe products, the firm alleged.
A sharper claim concerns the period immediately after the Bybit breach.
Greenfield said multiple sources told it that George, together with Gnosis co-founder Martin Köppelmann, pressed other Safe directors and co-founders to surrender a large block of SAFE tokens.
The pressure, according to those accounts, included a warning that Gnosis would sell its stake of roughly 10 percent of supply and publicly distance itself from the project.
The letter states that the reallocation went ahead.
These remain allegations that have not been tested by any authority.
Performance figures cited in the letter underline the frustration.
Assets held in Safe accounts fell from about $66 billion in January 2024 to roughly $30 billion by August 2026, a drop of more than half, while broader decentralized-finance value locked rose around 40 percent.
Stablecoin supply grew by roughly 135 percent over a similar span, yet stablecoins sitting in Safes on Ethereum rose only about 11 percent, and Safe’s share of circulating USDC fell from 12.8 percent to 2.5 percent.
On the revenue side, the foundation had reported more than $10 million in project-wide annualized revenue at the end of 2025 and aimed to double that and reach break-even in 2026.
Second-quarter 2026 revenue of $1.98 million implied an annualized run rate near $8 million, well short of the roughly $20 million that doubling would require.
Of about $93.5 million raised in 2022, roughly $60 million has been spent, leaving around $34 million in cash, according to the foundation’s own May 2026 MiCA disclosures; the SAFE token has lost more than 95 percent of its value.
From late 2025, Greenfield and its counsel asked the foundation to replace George, widen the board with externally recruited directors experienced in finance, risk, compliance and strategy, and run a board-led review of product, organization and token design with measurable targets.
The firm says it never sought a seat for itself.
The foundation later created a strategy commission and filled vacancies, including the appointment of Meissner during a period when the board had fallen to two members, below the three-person minimum in its deed.
Greenfield argues the commission has no decision-making power and that the board composition is essentially unchanged.
The investor stresses that the complaint is not a lawsuit against individuals and is not an attempt to seize control.
It says it remains supportive of the operating team’s recent enterprise and security work and intends to stay an ecosystem participant. It is asking the ESA to review the foundation’s governance and decide whether corrective steps are required.