Why did the star Web3 project Across Protocol choose to abandon DAO?

Original Title: What Across Protocol's going private proposal really means for its token holders and DAO

Original Author: Jacquelyn Melinek

Original Translation: Ken, ChainCatcher

Today, as many traditional companies delve into the realm of tokenization, Across Protocol has proposed a different path for its token holders: to buy back their tokens to become a private company or exchange them for equity.

@AcrossProtocol co-founder @hal2001 Lambur stated on the @TokenRelations @_TalkingTokens podcast, "The protocol is seeking privatization because its DAO structure hinders its development."

"I have always been a token maximalist," Lambur said. "We launched the Across token early on when its market cap was very low and conducted a very extensive airdrop, mainly because we wanted to build publicly and accumulate value for our community and users. But I think the macro environment has changed."

Across Protocol connects multiple major networks (including @Ethereum and @Solana), allowing users to bridge or swap tokens across chains. To date, it has processed over $35 billion in transaction volume.

However, with the growing demand from institutions and enterprises, its structure has proven to be a bottleneck. Lambur believes that "adopting a more traditional structure would allow for better development."

As far as we know, Across's proposal to privatize itself is a rare move, but it comes at a time when the industry is beginning to acknowledge that DAOs are a difficult organizational structure to operate.

In August 2025, when @UniswapFND proposed creating the legal entity DUNI, the protocol stated that a formal structure would bring more "capabilities and greater autonomy."

Earlier this week, @Aave founder @StaniKulechov wrote about the friction that comes with operating a DAO. "Just like we have always operated, DAOs are exceptionally difficult, and this difficulty is different from the kind of difficulty that comes with building complex things. The challenge lies in the fact that you are fighting against your own organizational structure every day."

For Across, Risk Labs is "currently responsible for signing contracts" and building the protocol as a foundation and legal entity, but Lambur stated that the DAO is separate from it.

The protocol currently operates under a "classic token structure," meaning you have an on-chain protocol and a legal entity that maintains a loose cooperative relationship with that protocol. But Lambur indicated that they are two independent structures. "This is one of the reasons people criticize the DAO model, and essentially, we are trying to unify the two," he added.

Before announcing the proposal on Wednesday, Across had considered this move for several months. "This is the situation: you examine the macro environment, see how undervalued these tokens are, and then look at the friction faced when trying to operate in a more traditional manner."

The proposal offers token holders two options: to exchange their ACX tokens for equity in AcrossCo. or to exchange them for USDC at the average market price over a month. Users holding a large number of tokens can directly exchange their tokens for shares, while users with fewer tokens can exchange them through a fee-free special purpose entity.

Lambur acknowledged that one of the biggest downsides of the proposal is the limitation on how many token holders can transfer their holdings into a potential S corporation through equity. "This is based on U.S. securities law, and we have designed it to be as inclusive as possible under the artificially possible premise."

"A U.S. C corporation cannot have 5,000 entries on its capital structure table," thus requiring some consolidation, he pointed out. Nevertheless, he remains optimistic that it will work.

Before releasing a Snapshot vote or ballot to the community, the proposal will have a two-week discussion period.