7 min read
|
Saved February 14, 2026
|
Copied!
Do you care about this?
Brevan Howard’s Nova Digital fund secured a rare refund right on its $25 million investment in Berachain, allowing it to reclaim funds if the project's token underperforms post-launch. This arrangement raises questions about transparency and legality, as other investors were not informed of the clause. The situation highlights potential issues with investor equality and compliance in crypto fundraising.
If you do, here's more
In late 2024, Berachain, a bear-themed blockchain project, hosted a lavish party in Singapore, highlighting its rise from a 2021 NFT initiative to a venture-backed entity valued at $1.5 billion. The startup raised over $142 million, with significant backing from Brevan Howard’s Nova Digital fund, which invested $25 million in exchange for BERA tokens priced at $3. Unusually, Berachain granted Nova a refund right on this investment for up to a year following the token generation event (TGE), scheduled for February 6, 2025. This clause essentially eliminates the risk for Nova, allowing it to reclaim its investment if BERA underperforms.
Legal experts have pointed out that post-TGE refund rights are rare in crypto fundraising. Typically, such provisions are only granted if a project fails to launch a token. If Nova chooses to exercise its refund right, it could request the return of its $25 million, effectively putting financial pressure on Berachain, especially since the BERA token has already dropped around 66% from its initial price. The refund agreement, detailed in a side letter, raises questions about its legality and whether other investors were informed about these terms.
Brevan Howard Digital's involvement with Berachain is set to change as Nova is being spun out due to strategic differences. The arrangement, which includes a $5 million deposit to activate the refund right, has sparked debate about the transparency of Berachain’s fundraising practices. An anonymous co-founder of Berachain defended the refund clause, stating it was a precautionary measure, but did not clarify why the refund right extends a year post-launch. The unusual nature of the agreement has drawn attention, with some experts suggesting it may have been a tactic to attract additional investors by leveraging Brevan Howard's reputation.
Questions about this article
No questions yet.