Brevan Howard заключил с Berachain уникальное соглашение на возврат $25 млн инвестиций Brevan Howard Enters Unique Agreement with Berachain for $25 Million Investment Refund

The blockchain project Berachain has incorporated an exclusive investment return clause into its agreement with Nova Digital, a subsidiary of Brevan Howard, ensuring a $25 million reimbursement within a year following the launch of the BERA token. This information was reported by Unchained.

These terms deviate from traditional venture capital investments. The organization effectively shields its funds from risk. If the token appreciates in value, Nova Digital stands to profit, but if it declines, they can simply reclaim their investment.

Legal experts agree that the right to a refund post-asset release is a rare occurrence. Two specialists noted that typically, such clauses are only applicable if the project fails to release the token on time.

“The only sensible reason a company would enter into such an agreement with a leading investor is to leverage the reputation of a well-known fund to attract other participants to the round. When other investors see that a reputable organization is leading the deal, it boosts their trust and willingness to invest,” commented Gabriel Shapiro, co-founder of MetaLeX Labs.

The only known instance of this investment return right involving tokens was the Flying Tulip project, initiated by co-founder of Sonic (formerly Fantom) and DeFi developer Andre Cronje. During a funding round of $200 million, all investors were afforded the opportunity to reclaim their investments.

Two anonymous investors in Berachain confirmed they had not been informed of any special conditions regarding Brevan Howard.

Should Nova Digital exercise its right (which seems logical, given that the BERA price has plummeted by 66% from the agreed level of $3), Berachain will need to source funds for the refund. Per project conditions, the investors’ tokens are locked for one year.

Berachain’s founder, known as Smokey The Bera, dismissed Unchained’s reports, calling journalist Jack Kubinec’s investigation “commissioned,” “incomplete,” and “inaccurate.”

“I understand that during market downturns, everyone craves drama, but this article was clearly created with the involvement of unscrupulous individuals—specifically, some disgruntled former employees,” he stated.

According to Smokey The Bera, the Berachain team forged several commercial agreements with Brevan. The return clause was initiated by the fund itself as a protective measure in case the project failed to launch the token or secure listing on exchanges.

In such a scenario, the locked tokens would not align with the organization’s investment strategy, which focuses on liquid assets.

“We signed an additional agreement requiring Nova to ensure liquidity in the network post-launch. This is standard practice, not a method to attract investors or insure against a price drop after listing,” clarified the Berachain founder.

He also emphasized that Nova is the largest holder of BERA, combining locked tokens from Series B with purchases on the open market.

Responses to Smokey The Bera’s denial were mixed, with some users expressing skepticism regarding the founder’s statements.

“You haven’t answered the main question raised in the article: Does Nova have the right to reclaim assets?” inquired one user.

Another community member launched a proof of liquidity (PoL) system as the first phase of its transition to on-chain governance.