At some point workers percentage should also be adjusted, I know I know no premine etc., but growing platform is in their best interest, but it seems for now everybody is taking the responsibility for growing the platform (by giving away more from their respective LP daily rewards) but them, and they are the ones who will profit the most from it as they are holding the most of native token.
Here is a relevant discussion outlining the rationale behind the worker allocation. No pre-mine is only part of the reasoning behind the decision. It has not even been two months since this last discussion so not much has changed that would result in a change in stance for me.
Having said that, at some point in the future I would expect to see worker token allocations changed to the DAO Fund.
To add to what has been said, the workers get 20%. The BALN/bnUSD pool gets 17.5% atm. I hope we should not need to outline which has overwhelmingly more positive economic impact on Balanced. In the last 24h as of writing, that pool as generated $587 in fees, half of which go to LPs, so about 290. That gets 17.5% versus worker tokens 20%.
1 Like
I have to respectively disagree with You here, two months is 1/3 of the life span of this platform, we are nearing the point where BALN will reach half of its original distribution. I don’t mind showcasing other DeFi projects but comparing them is difficult task. Without any disrespect to ICON for now tis a different beast and its user base thus Balanced is limited, so in my modest opinion keeping the ones we have or can get “happy”(or at least motivated to keep their money here) is very important. “Fixing” rebalancing (I myself totally skipped borrowing because of it, I am sure its more psychological thing, people don’t like when others play with their toys read money) by impacting another rather large part of projects users base should come with some sort of showing of true spirit of decentralization, that we are all equal in it, and even symbolic 1-2% out off workers share would be a good sign to community, again in my subjective opinion.
Not everything can be quantified economically, there are many different factors that come in to play when it comes to keeping people comfortable within certain communities (DeFi), especially when large sums of money are considered and this is what I am talking about here.
Imho the constant rebalancing loop is quite an issue that needs to be tackled instantly.
In the near future I think Equality Exchange will lead to a stable peg, but we are not there yet.
So the bnUSD/IUSDT pool appears to be the lowest hanging fruit for price stability.
Now I am trying to look at this with an unbiased opinion with no stake in BALN (disclosure: we and I hold BALN) at what APR I would farm this pool just for profit under the assumptions that
a) BALN is rather an illiquid asset compared i.e. CVX/CRV
b) bnUSD is a relatively volatile stablecoin compared to i.e. MIM or DAI which are also minted through CDPs.
I could easily get a yield of 30%+ on farming in relatively low risk pools such as ALCX, SPELL, CVX etc. on Ethereum or get 50%+ on Curve Factory Fixed Forex pools with other less established synthetic assets.
So taking this into account, I think anything below 45% APR I would personally not enter the bnUSD/IUSDT pool.
After some napkin math, if I haven’t done any mistakes here, that would be a pool size of roughly $2.5m with new BALN allocations and this is also what I expect the new bnUSD/IUSDT pool end up with in size.
Would this pool actually be big enough?
Would be curious to see if there has been done some calculations around this.
Couldn’t agree more here. I’ve been thinking about this non-stop recently and I do believe I’ve come to a reasonable conclusion, though I will share that on a different thread under meta-governance later today.
As for your points here, that math sounds about right and I agree with what you’re saying. I believe 40-50% on stablecoin yield is a decent target and would be happy to raise the allocations to those pools in order to incentivize folks to bring more stablecoins into the system and “soak up” some bnUSD supply.
I also think the bnUSD addition to Omm is going to soak up a decent amount of supply.
1 Like