qerranews 
Shifting Narrative Emerges
The founder of Berachain has publicly rejected claims that its Series B investors were granted a one-year right to a $25 million investment refund, calling the framing “inaccurate” and “incomplete.” The dispute emerged after a report from Unchained alleged that Brevan Howard’s crypto-focused fund, Nova Digital, secured refund rights through a side letter following Berachain’s April 2024 Series B fundraising round.
The report claimed that Nova Digital could recoup “some or all” of its investment for twelve months after Berachain’s token generation event (TGE), which took place on February 6, 2024 — meaning the supposed refund option would extend until February 6, 2026.
But Berachain’s founder, known pseudonymously as Smokey The Bera, has disputed the framing, insisting that Nova participated on the same paperwork as all other investors and that the reported agreement was more nuanced than portrayed.
Founder Responds Publicly
According to Smokey, the terms mentioned in the report were not preferential and did not provide Nova Digital with exclusive protections. Instead, Smokey emphasized that Brevan Howard — via its liquid-only investment vehicle Nova — co-led the Series B from its Abu Dhabi office under standard terms:
“Brevan Howard co-led our Series B a year ago via Nova, a new liquid-only vehicle, on the same terms as all other investors.”
Smokey clarified that Nova had approached Berachain months before to discuss leading the fundraise, but required additional legal provisions specific to its liquidity-focused mandate — not because of concern over post-launch losses, but due to fund eligibility requirements.
TGE Risk Trigger
Guarding Against Failure
Smokey said Nova requested a safeguard only in the event that Berachain failed to launch or list its token, which would have made their BERA allocation ineligible for their investment strategy.
“If Berachain failed to TGE and get listed, the locked tokens purchased would not be eligible under Nova’s liquid strategy.”
As a result, Berachain and Nova agreed to a side letter that outlined contingencies and committed Nova to additional commercial arrangements, including network liquidity provision — something only possible after TGE.
This distinction is critical: the letter was not a refund clause tied to token performance, but rather a conditional protection tied to the TGE itself. Smokey stressed that similar arrangements have precedent in the industry, and that the letter was not used to close the deal with an otherwise hesitant party.
Ongoing Investor Support
Nova’s Growing BERA Exposure
Smokey highlighted that Nova Digital remains one of the largest tokenholders of Berachain and has continued to increase exposure, even buying additional BERA on open markets. Despite operating a liquid strategy and facing a harsh altcoin climate, Nova has actively supported the network and its liquidity.
“They have increased their BERA exposure over time, despite running a liquid fund in a harsh alt environment.”
This paints a different picture from the media narrative — one that suggests long-term alignment rather than short-term escape mechanisms. Nova remains both an investor and active liquidity provider within the Berachain ecosystem.
Token Faces Heavy Drop
Market Still Cautious
Despite the clarification, market conditions remain challenging. The BERA token has dropped 93% from its peak of $14.83 at launch in February and currently trades around $1.05, up 3.2% on the day according to CoinGecko.
Although the price decline has fueled speculation about investor confidence, the continued support from key Series B participants — such as Nova — suggests confidence in Berachain’s long-term roadmap.
However, with regulatory concerns, shifting liquidity preferences, and a cooling altcoin market, the narrative surrounding Berachain’s fundraising structure is likely to continue attracting scrutiny.
Transparency Now Crucial
Clear Terms Needed
The controversy highlights a broader issue within crypto fundraising: how side letters and investor protections are framed publicly. As institutional investment grows in crypto infrastructure, transparency around deal structures may become increasingly important, particularly for token-based ecosystems.
Berachain’s handling of the situation suggests a strong attempt to control the narrative before speculation escalates, especially at a time when price action remains volatile and sentiment around blockchain investments is mixed.
The final takeaway is clear — Berachain denies any misrepresentation, insisting that all investors, including Nova, had equal footing, and that the agreement was not about post-launch market risk, but about pre-launch technical eligibility.
Conclusion
While media reports sparked concerns over preferential treatment, Berachain’s founder argues the opposite — that Nova Digital simply required structural safeguards for its liquidity mandate, not a refund escape hatch.
With BERA down over 90% from launch highs, investor confidence will hinge not just on price recovery — but on transparent communication, continued liquidity, and demonstrable ecosystem activity as Berachain moves forward.