• Casa Panenka Lightpaper - Part 1

• Casa Panenka Lightpaper - Part 2

• Casa Panenka Lightpaper - Part 3

Casa Panenka's governance model balances democratic participation with operational expertise. Token holders make strategic decisions through transparent voting, while professional management handles day-to-day operations that require football knowledge and quick execution.

This section outlines how decisions are made, who makes them, and what mechanisms ensure accountability.

Casa Panenka issues a fixed supply of governance tokens using the ERC-1155 standard on Reef Chain. Each token represents:

• Voting rights on all Tier 1 decisions (see below)

• Economic ownership in the club's equity value

• Access rights to community governance, discussions, and proposals

The total token supply is fixed and determined based on the final club acquisition price and capital raise. There is no inflation, no vesting schedules, and no ability to mint additional governance tokens without a constitutional vote by existing token holders.

This ensures that early supporters aren't diluted by later issuance and that governance power remains stable and predictable.

All governance tokens are permissioned, requiring KYC/AML verification before purchase or transfer. This ensures:

• Compliance with securities regulations globally

• Prevention of money laundering or illicit activity

• Verified identity for significant governance decisions (particularly club acquisition and major financial commitments)

The exact distribution percentages will be finalized during Phase 1 (Capitalization), but the approximate allocation is:

• Public token sale: 70-80% (target raise: €150,000-€250,000)

• Treasury reserve: 10-15% (for future operations, emergency funding, strategic partnerships)

• Founding contributors: 5-10% (founder and early community builders who contribute before token sale)

• Advisors/partners: 2-5% (football experts, legal counsel, regional partners as they join)

All allocations are transparent and published before token sale. No hidden allocations. No insider deals.

Casa Panenka uses a three-tier decision model that assigns different levels of authority based on the importance and expertise required for each decision.

These are the most consequential decisions that fundamentally shape the club's direction. All Tier 1 decisions require a formal on-chain vote by governance token holders.

1. Club acquisition (which club to purchase, purchase price approval, acquisition terms)

2. Manager hiring and firing (first team manager selection and dismissal)

3. Major transfer spending (any single transfer fee or wage commitment above €5,000)

4. Annual budget approval (operating budget, capital expenditures, reserve allocations)

5. Stadium and infrastructure investments (facility purchases, major renovations, training ground improvements)

6. Constitutional changes (modifications to governance structure, voting thresholds, token economics)

7. Sale of the club (if Casa Panenka ever decides to sell, token holders vote on terms and approve sale)

8. Significant commercial partnerships (naming rights, main kit sponsors, broadcasting deals above certain value)

• Proposal submission: Any token holder can submit a Tier 1 proposal

• Discussion period: 5 days minimum for community discussion before voting begins

• Voting period: 3 days (72 hours) for all token holders to cast votes

• Quorum requirement: Minimum 50% of all eligible tokens must participate in the vote

• Passing threshold: Simple majority (50% + 1) of votes cast must approve

• Implementation: Approved proposals are executed by the Management Committee within 30 days (or timeline specified in proposal)

Example: Manager Hiring

A token holder submits a proposal: "Hire [Name] as first team manager on a 2-year contract at €15,000/year salary."

The community discusses for 5 days. Questions are asked: What's their track record? Do they have experience in our league? What's their tactical philosophy?

Voting opens for 3 days. Token holders vote yes or no. If quorum is met (50%+ participation) and a simple majority approves, the Management Committee executes the contract.

These decisions require football expertise, operational knowledge, or quick turnaround times that make token holder voting impractical. The Management Committee handles Tier 2 decisions but must report all actions transparently to token holders.

1. Day-to-day operations (staffing, scheduling, logistics, administrative functions)

2. Minor transfers and loans (signings or wage commitments below €5,000)

3. Youth academy decisions (coaching hires, player recruitment, training programs)

4. Marketing and commercial partnerships (below significant value thresholds, local sponsors, merchandise deals)

5. Staff hiring (non-manager positions: coaches, scouts, medical staff, administrative personnel)

6. Match operations (ticketing, security, event management, hospitality)

7. Community programs (local partnerships, youth outreach, charitable initiatives)

8. Financial management (within approved budget, cash flow, vendor contracts)

• Monthly reports: Management Committee publishes detailed monthly reports on all Tier 2 decisions

• Financial transparency: All expenses, contracts, and commitments are published in real-time

• Question periods: Token holders can submit questions about any Management Committee decision

• Override mechanism: If 25% of token holders petition for a vote on a Tier 2 decision, it can be elevated to a Tier 1 vote

The Management Committee consists of 3-5 members with complementary expertise:

• Operations lead (day-to-day club management, local liaison)

• Sporting director (player recruitment, coaching coordination, football operations)

• Financial officer (budget management, financial planning, commercial deals)

• Community liaison (local partnerships, fan engagement, regional relationships)

• Regional advisor (optional, depending on club location—someone with deep knowledge of local football ecosystem)

Management Committee members are hired by token holder vote (Tier 1 decision) and can be removed by token holder vote. They serve at the pleasure of the community.

These decisions require immediate football expertise and cannot be subject to committee or community voting without undermining competitive performance. Tier 3 decisions are made by the first team manager and football staff.

1. Match tactics and team selection (starting lineups, formations, substitutions, in-game decisions)

2. Training regimens (daily training schedules, fitness programs, tactical preparation)

3. Player development (individual coaching, positional training, rehabilitation protocols)

4. Match preparation (opponent analysis, scouting reports, game plans)

5. Squad management (captain selection, player discipline, locker room culture)

Football is a professional sport requiring expertise, quick decision-making, and confidential planning. A manager cannot wait for a 7-day vote to decide whether to start Player A or Player B. Opposing teams cannot know our tactics in advance.

Tier 3 preserves the manager's authority to manage while keeping them accountable to token holders through Tier 1 hiring/firing authority. If the community dislikes the manager's decisions consistently, they can vote to replace the manager—but they cannot micromanage match-day operations.

Any token holder can submit a proposal for any Tier 1 decision. Proposals must include:

• Clear title (e.g., "Approve €8,000 transfer fee for Player X")

• Detailed description (rationale, financial impact, timeline, alternatives considered)

• Supporting evidence (player stats, scouting reports, financial projections, etc.)

• Implementation plan (who executes, when, what happens if approved/rejected)

Proposals are submitted via Casa Panenka's governance platform and immediately visible to all token holders.

After submission, proposals enter a mandatory 5-day discussion period before voting opens. During this time:

• Token holders ask questions and debate merits

• Proposer responds to concerns and may amend proposal based on feedback

• Community experts (football analysts, financial advisors, regional specialists) provide input

The goal is informed decision-making, not rushed votes.

Voting opens for 3 days (72 hours). During this time:

• Token holders cast votes: Yes, No, or Abstain

• Votes are recorded on-chain (Reef blockchain) for transparency and immutability

• Real-time vote tallies are publicly visible

• Token holders can change votes until voting period ends

For a vote to be valid and binding:

• Quorum: At least 50% of all eligible governance tokens must participate (vote Yes, No, or Abstain)

• Passing threshold: Of the votes cast, at least 50% + 1 must be "Yes"

Examples:

• Scenario 1: 10,000 total tokens exist. 6,000 tokens vote (60% participation = quorum met). 3,500 vote Yes, 2,500 vote No. Result: PASSED (58% approval)

• Scenario 2: 10,000 total tokens exist. 4,000 tokens vote (40% participation = quorum NOT met). Even if 100% vote Yes, Result: FAILED (quorum requirement protects against low-turnout manipulation)

• Scenario 3: 10,000 total tokens exist. 8,000 tokens vote (80% participation = quorum met). 3,900 vote Yes, 4,100 vote No. Result: FAILED (only 48.75% approval, below 50% + 1 threshold)

If a proposal passes, the Management Committee (or relevant authority) executes the decision within the timeline specified in the proposal (typically 30 days unless otherwise stated).

Implementation is tracked and reported transparently. Token holders can verify that approved proposals are actually executed.

If a proposal fails (either by not meeting quorum or not reaching passing threshold), it cannot be resubmitted for 30 days unless circumstances materially change.

This prevents spam proposals and ensures failed votes are taken seriously.

Football clubs occasionally face urgent decisions that cannot wait for a 10-day governance process (5-day discussion + 3-day vote).

In genuine emergencies (e.g., player injury requiring immediate replacement signing, league deadline compliance, urgent facility repair), the Management Committee has authority to act immediately if:

1. Time constraint: Decision must be made in less than 72 hours

2. Material impact: Delay would cause competitive, financial, or legal harm

3. Budget compliance: Action stays within approved annual budget

4. Transparency: Full explanation published within 24 hours of decision

After any emergency action:

• Management Committee publishes detailed rationale within 24 hours

• Token holders can question the decision

• If 25% of token holders petition, a retroactive vote is held on whether the emergency action was appropriate

• If retroactive vote fails, Management Committee members face potential removal vote

This balances operational agility with democratic accountability.

Disagreements are inevitable in any organization. Casa Panenka establishes clear conflict resolution mechanisms.

If token holders disagree with Management Committee decisions:

1. Question period: Submit questions publicly; Management Committee must respond within 72 hours

2. Petition for vote: If 25% of token holders petition, elevate Tier 2 decision to Tier 1 vote

3. No-confidence vote: If 40% of token holders petition, trigger vote on Management Committee member removal

If Management Committee members disagree internally:

1. Majority rule: Management Committee decisions require simple majority of Committee members

2. Escalation: If Committee cannot reach consensus after 7 days, decision escalates to token holder vote

3. Tie-breaking: In case of 50/50 split, Operations Lead has tie-breaking vote (or token holder vote if Operations Lead is conflicted)

If the manager and token holders clash over football decisions:

1. Manager autonomy: Manager retains Tier 3 authority regardless of community opinion

2. Accountability: If community dislikes manager's approach, they can vote to replace manager (Tier 1)

3. No micromanagement: Token holders cannot override Tier 3 decisions without firing the manager first

This preserves manager authority while ensuring ultimate accountability to ownership.

Casa Panenka's governance includes several checks against abuse of power:

• One token, one vote: No quadratic voting or weighted systems; every token has equal power

• Quorum requirements: 50% participation prevents small groups from deciding in low-turnout votes

• Transparency: All votes are public; token holders can see if whales are coordinating

• Community oversight: If whales abuse power, community can propose constitutional changes to add protections

• Transparency requirements: All Tier 2 decisions published monthly

• Petition mechanism: 25% of token holders can elevate any decision to a vote

• No-confidence votes: 40% petition triggers removal vote

• Budget limits: Management Committee cannot exceed approved budget without new vote

• Discussion period: 5 days of scrutiny before voting opens

• Quorum requirements: Prevent low-turnout manipulation

• Resubmission limits: Failed proposals cannot be resubmitted for 30 days

• Tiered system: Complex football decisions stay with professionals (Tier 3)

• Expert input: Management Committee provides analysis and recommendations

• Override protection: Manager cannot be overruled mid-season unless fired

Casa Panenka's governance is designed to evolve as the community learns and grows.

Any token holder can propose changes to governance structure, voting thresholds, or decision tiers. Constitutional amendments require:

• Higher quorum: 66% of tokens must participate (vs. 50% for normal votes)

• Supermajority: 66% approval required (vs. 50% + 1 for normal votes)

• Discussion period: 7 days (vs. 5 days for normal proposals)

• Implementation delay: 30-day waiting period after passage before changes take effect

This higher bar ensures constitutional changes have broad support and aren't made impulsively.

Every 12 months, Casa Panenka conducts a governance review:

• What's working well?

• What's causing friction?

• What decisions should move between tiers?

• What processes need improvement?

Token holders vote on whether to accept proposed governance improvements based on the annual review.

Casa Panenka's governance model is built on a simple principle: strategic decisions belong to the community; operational decisions belong to professionals.

We don't believe in democracy for democracy's sake. We believe in democracy where it creates better outcomes—strategic direction, major investments, accountability.

We don't believe in technocracy for technocracy's sake. We believe in professional management where expertise matters—football tactics, day-to-day operations, rapid decision-making.

The art is knowing which decisions belong in which category. This framework is our best attempt to draw those lines clearly.

As we learn from experience, we'll adjust. But the core commitment remains: Casa Panenka is owned by its token holders, managed by professionals, and operated with complete transparency.

Casa Panenka is a Decentralized Autonomous Organization (DAO) governed by a community of football (soccer) lovers and fanatics. Many passionate fans want to own and operate team, but this is financially out of reach for them. Together we will write a new chapter in football club ownership, putting the benefits of many ahead of just a wealthy few. The collective ambitions of the DAO's contributors, whose goal is to own a professional football team, describes the underlying mission of DAOs in its purest form:

Out of many, one. Let's own this.

If you want to contribute to Casa Panenka, please join us on Discord.

Join us on X | Instagram | TikTok | Discord | YouTube

• Casa Panenka Lightpaper - Part 1

• Casa Panenka Lightpaper - Part 2

• Casa Panenka Lightpaper - Part 3

Casa Panenka's governance model balances democratic participation with operational expertise. Token holders make strategic decisions through transparent voting, while professional management handles day-to-day operations that require football knowledge and quick execution.

This section outlines how decisions are made, who makes them, and what mechanisms ensure accountability.

Casa Panenka issues a fixed supply of governance tokens using the ERC-1155 standard on Reef Chain. Each token represents:

• Voting rights on all Tier 1 decisions (see below)

• Economic ownership in the club's equity value

• Access rights to community governance, discussions, and proposals

The total token supply is fixed and determined based on the final club acquisition price and capital raise. There is no inflation, no vesting schedules, and no ability to mint additional governance tokens without a constitutional vote by existing token holders.

This ensures that early supporters aren't diluted by later issuance and that governance power remains stable and predictable.

All governance tokens are permissioned, requiring KYC/AML verification before purchase or transfer. This ensures:

• Compliance with securities regulations globally

• Prevention of money laundering or illicit activity

• Verified identity for significant governance decisions (particularly club acquisition and major financial commitments)

The exact distribution percentages will be finalized during Phase 1 (Capitalization), but the approximate allocation is:

• Public token sale: 70-80% (target raise: €150,000-€250,000)

• Treasury reserve: 10-15% (for future operations, emergency funding, strategic partnerships)

• Founding contributors: 5-10% (founder and early community builders who contribute before token sale)

• Advisors/partners: 2-5% (football experts, legal counsel, regional partners as they join)

All allocations are transparent and published before token sale. No hidden allocations. No insider deals.

Casa Panenka uses a three-tier decision model that assigns different levels of authority based on the importance and expertise required for each decision.

These are the most consequential decisions that fundamentally shape the club's direction. All Tier 1 decisions require a formal on-chain vote by governance token holders.

1. Club acquisition (which club to purchase, purchase price approval, acquisition terms)

2. Manager hiring and firing (first team manager selection and dismissal)

3. Major transfer spending (any single transfer fee or wage commitment above €5,000)

4. Annual budget approval (operating budget, capital expenditures, reserve allocations)

5. Stadium and infrastructure investments (facility purchases, major renovations, training ground improvements)

6. Constitutional changes (modifications to governance structure, voting thresholds, token economics)

7. Sale of the club (if Casa Panenka ever decides to sell, token holders vote on terms and approve sale)

8. Significant commercial partnerships (naming rights, main kit sponsors, broadcasting deals above certain value)

• Proposal submission: Any token holder can submit a Tier 1 proposal

• Discussion period: 5 days minimum for community discussion before voting begins

• Voting period: 3 days (72 hours) for all token holders to cast votes

• Quorum requirement: Minimum 50% of all eligible tokens must participate in the vote

• Passing threshold: Simple majority (50% + 1) of votes cast must approve

• Implementation: Approved proposals are executed by the Management Committee within 30 days (or timeline specified in proposal)

Example: Manager Hiring

A token holder submits a proposal: "Hire [Name] as first team manager on a 2-year contract at €15,000/year salary."

The community discusses for 5 days. Questions are asked: What's their track record? Do they have experience in our league? What's their tactical philosophy?

Voting opens for 3 days. Token holders vote yes or no. If quorum is met (50%+ participation) and a simple majority approves, the Management Committee executes the contract.

These decisions require football expertise, operational knowledge, or quick turnaround times that make token holder voting impractical. The Management Committee handles Tier 2 decisions but must report all actions transparently to token holders.

1. Day-to-day operations (staffing, scheduling, logistics, administrative functions)

2. Minor transfers and loans (signings or wage commitments below €5,000)

3. Youth academy decisions (coaching hires, player recruitment, training programs)

4. Marketing and commercial partnerships (below significant value thresholds, local sponsors, merchandise deals)

5. Staff hiring (non-manager positions: coaches, scouts, medical staff, administrative personnel)

6. Match operations (ticketing, security, event management, hospitality)

7. Community programs (local partnerships, youth outreach, charitable initiatives)

8. Financial management (within approved budget, cash flow, vendor contracts)

• Monthly reports: Management Committee publishes detailed monthly reports on all Tier 2 decisions

• Financial transparency: All expenses, contracts, and commitments are published in real-time

• Question periods: Token holders can submit questions about any Management Committee decision

• Override mechanism: If 25% of token holders petition for a vote on a Tier 2 decision, it can be elevated to a Tier 1 vote

The Management Committee consists of 3-5 members with complementary expertise:

• Operations lead (day-to-day club management, local liaison)

• Sporting director (player recruitment, coaching coordination, football operations)

• Financial officer (budget management, financial planning, commercial deals)

• Community liaison (local partnerships, fan engagement, regional relationships)

• Regional advisor (optional, depending on club location—someone with deep knowledge of local football ecosystem)

Management Committee members are hired by token holder vote (Tier 1 decision) and can be removed by token holder vote. They serve at the pleasure of the community.

These decisions require immediate football expertise and cannot be subject to committee or community voting without undermining competitive performance. Tier 3 decisions are made by the first team manager and football staff.

1. Match tactics and team selection (starting lineups, formations, substitutions, in-game decisions)

2. Training regimens (daily training schedules, fitness programs, tactical preparation)

3. Player development (individual coaching, positional training, rehabilitation protocols)

4. Match preparation (opponent analysis, scouting reports, game plans)

5. Squad management (captain selection, player discipline, locker room culture)

Football is a professional sport requiring expertise, quick decision-making, and confidential planning. A manager cannot wait for a 7-day vote to decide whether to start Player A or Player B. Opposing teams cannot know our tactics in advance.

Tier 3 preserves the manager's authority to manage while keeping them accountable to token holders through Tier 1 hiring/firing authority. If the community dislikes the manager's decisions consistently, they can vote to replace the manager—but they cannot micromanage match-day operations.

Any token holder can submit a proposal for any Tier 1 decision. Proposals must include:

• Clear title (e.g., "Approve €8,000 transfer fee for Player X")

• Detailed description (rationale, financial impact, timeline, alternatives considered)

• Supporting evidence (player stats, scouting reports, financial projections, etc.)

• Implementation plan (who executes, when, what happens if approved/rejected)

Proposals are submitted via Casa Panenka's governance platform and immediately visible to all token holders.

After submission, proposals enter a mandatory 5-day discussion period before voting opens. During this time:

• Token holders ask questions and debate merits

• Proposer responds to concerns and may amend proposal based on feedback

• Community experts (football analysts, financial advisors, regional specialists) provide input

The goal is informed decision-making, not rushed votes.

Voting opens for 3 days (72 hours). During this time:

• Token holders cast votes: Yes, No, or Abstain

• Votes are recorded on-chain (Reef blockchain) for transparency and immutability

• Real-time vote tallies are publicly visible

• Token holders can change votes until voting period ends

For a vote to be valid and binding:

• Quorum: At least 50% of all eligible governance tokens must participate (vote Yes, No, or Abstain)

• Passing threshold: Of the votes cast, at least 50% + 1 must be "Yes"

Examples:

• Scenario 1: 10,000 total tokens exist. 6,000 tokens vote (60% participation = quorum met). 3,500 vote Yes, 2,500 vote No. Result: PASSED (58% approval)

• Scenario 2: 10,000 total tokens exist. 4,000 tokens vote (40% participation = quorum NOT met). Even if 100% vote Yes, Result: FAILED (quorum requirement protects against low-turnout manipulation)

• Scenario 3: 10,000 total tokens exist. 8,000 tokens vote (80% participation = quorum met). 3,900 vote Yes, 4,100 vote No. Result: FAILED (only 48.75% approval, below 50% + 1 threshold)

If a proposal passes, the Management Committee (or relevant authority) executes the decision within the timeline specified in the proposal (typically 30 days unless otherwise stated).

Implementation is tracked and reported transparently. Token holders can verify that approved proposals are actually executed.

If a proposal fails (either by not meeting quorum or not reaching passing threshold), it cannot be resubmitted for 30 days unless circumstances materially change.

This prevents spam proposals and ensures failed votes are taken seriously.

Football clubs occasionally face urgent decisions that cannot wait for a 10-day governance process (5-day discussion + 3-day vote).

In genuine emergencies (e.g., player injury requiring immediate replacement signing, league deadline compliance, urgent facility repair), the Management Committee has authority to act immediately if:

1. Time constraint: Decision must be made in less than 72 hours

2. Material impact: Delay would cause competitive, financial, or legal harm

3. Budget compliance: Action stays within approved annual budget

4. Transparency: Full explanation published within 24 hours of decision

After any emergency action:

• Management Committee publishes detailed rationale within 24 hours

• Token holders can question the decision

• If 25% of token holders petition, a retroactive vote is held on whether the emergency action was appropriate

• If retroactive vote fails, Management Committee members face potential removal vote

This balances operational agility with democratic accountability.

Disagreements are inevitable in any organization. Casa Panenka establishes clear conflict resolution mechanisms.

If token holders disagree with Management Committee decisions:

1. Question period: Submit questions publicly; Management Committee must respond within 72 hours

2. Petition for vote: If 25% of token holders petition, elevate Tier 2 decision to Tier 1 vote

3. No-confidence vote: If 40% of token holders petition, trigger vote on Management Committee member removal

If Management Committee members disagree internally:

1. Majority rule: Management Committee decisions require simple majority of Committee members

2. Escalation: If Committee cannot reach consensus after 7 days, decision escalates to token holder vote

3. Tie-breaking: In case of 50/50 split, Operations Lead has tie-breaking vote (or token holder vote if Operations Lead is conflicted)

If the manager and token holders clash over football decisions:

1. Manager autonomy: Manager retains Tier 3 authority regardless of community opinion

2. Accountability: If community dislikes manager's approach, they can vote to replace manager (Tier 1)

3. No micromanagement: Token holders cannot override Tier 3 decisions without firing the manager first

This preserves manager authority while ensuring ultimate accountability to ownership.

Casa Panenka's governance includes several checks against abuse of power:

• One token, one vote: No quadratic voting or weighted systems; every token has equal power

• Quorum requirements: 50% participation prevents small groups from deciding in low-turnout votes

• Transparency: All votes are public; token holders can see if whales are coordinating

• Community oversight: If whales abuse power, community can propose constitutional changes to add protections

• Transparency requirements: All Tier 2 decisions published monthly

• Petition mechanism: 25% of token holders can elevate any decision to a vote

• No-confidence votes: 40% petition triggers removal vote

• Budget limits: Management Committee cannot exceed approved budget without new vote

• Discussion period: 5 days of scrutiny before voting opens

• Quorum requirements: Prevent low-turnout manipulation

• Resubmission limits: Failed proposals cannot be resubmitted for 30 days

• Tiered system: Complex football decisions stay with professionals (Tier 3)

• Expert input: Management Committee provides analysis and recommendations

• Override protection: Manager cannot be overruled mid-season unless fired

Casa Panenka's governance is designed to evolve as the community learns and grows.

Any token holder can propose changes to governance structure, voting thresholds, or decision tiers. Constitutional amendments require:

• Higher quorum: 66% of tokens must participate (vs. 50% for normal votes)

• Supermajority: 66% approval required (vs. 50% + 1 for normal votes)

• Discussion period: 7 days (vs. 5 days for normal proposals)

• Implementation delay: 30-day waiting period after passage before changes take effect

This higher bar ensures constitutional changes have broad support and aren't made impulsively.

Every 12 months, Casa Panenka conducts a governance review:

• What's working well?

• What's causing friction?

• What decisions should move between tiers?

• What processes need improvement?

Token holders vote on whether to accept proposed governance improvements based on the annual review.

Casa Panenka's governance model is built on a simple principle: strategic decisions belong to the community; operational decisions belong to professionals.

We don't believe in democracy for democracy's sake. We believe in democracy where it creates better outcomes—strategic direction, major investments, accountability.

We don't believe in technocracy for technocracy's sake. We believe in professional management where expertise matters—football tactics, day-to-day operations, rapid decision-making.

The art is knowing which decisions belong in which category. This framework is our best attempt to draw those lines clearly.

As we learn from experience, we'll adjust. But the core commitment remains: Casa Panenka is owned by its token holders, managed by professionals, and operated with complete transparency.

Casa Panenka is a Decentralized Autonomous Organization (DAO) governed by a community of football (soccer) lovers and fanatics. Many passionate fans want to own and operate team, but this is financially out of reach for them. Together we will write a new chapter in football club ownership, putting the benefits of many ahead of just a wealthy few. The collective ambitions of the DAO's contributors, whose goal is to own a professional football team, describes the underlying mission of DAOs in its purest form:

Out of many, one. Let's own this.

If you want to contribute to Casa Panenka, please join us on Discord.

Join us on X | Instagram | TikTok | Discord | YouTube