OIP-82: Tender Offer for Spartacus Finance

willynikes
Ser, you might wanna stop "liking" your own comments. It looks sad .
Second, the only thing this tender does is signal our intent to acquire the treasury and give SPA holders a way out. You can keep the "tech".
(This only happens if our community approves it, and then if the SPA community wants it, if they don't, it won't happen, so your energies might be better spent making sure you can convince YOUR community of your point of view).

zulqarnain Dev already answered. “We are preparing for solidly war”. The issue won’t get raised for snapshot now. You guys wasting your time at this point unless u raise offer. We would rather redistribute than partner with ohm. Nice try tho. Wagmi 3,3

Big NO for me.

saupa yes, should be done based on wsSPA which represents a constant portion of the treasury

Spa does not want to be bought. Your offer was too low and we don’t want it. U can’t do batiks takeover by turning the community against spa. If devs keys are so important well here’s his response to your offer. Thanks but no thanks we build. https://discord.com/channels/901810422590627880/901810422590627883/944940405072474152

Dom98000 this is at a discount to market value of the treasury. just at a premium to the current token price

I am weary of any affiliation with SPA at this time. The project has seemed stagnant since spartacadabra launch. Allegations by WAGMI could have been refuted if Spartacus had brought the receipts but the post was simply deleted. I would be more inclined to be positive about the proposal laid out above if Spartacus seemed healthy. I hold wsSPA and would benefit from this proposal. I do not think this is the right move for Ohmies.

I certainly approve of buying assets at a discount. As has been suggested previously marking the tender price as a % reduction from backing would be preferable given price volatility.

The fact that no terms are attached to the developer grant points to it being an incentive for the devs to ensure the deal goes through. I'm not against paying a price if we still come out with discounted assets, but I think Olympus should be more targeted and transparent here and actually state what it wants.

From my understanding: we want to persuade the devs who a) have skills we want in Olympus and b) control the treasury of the protocol. So lets put a list together of who they are and make them an offer.

Using language like 'developer grant' and 'tender offer' is very nice and 3,3 but lets be real. This is a takeover. We need to persuade key players to cooperate. If ohmies view the grant as a price to gain substantial discounted assets, I think there will much less resistance. Then its up to SPA devs + holders whether they want to do it.

It would be good if there is some number listing of Before & After to buy the DAO.

And the developer grant i think is kind of risky, since their dev has ghohsted a while,

thats not a good signal..

willynikes hey there. Thanks for your input as all feedback is welcome. That said, would greatly appreciate if you focused on the substance of the proposal and stopped spamming the forum. Thank you.

tumblebumble this proposal poses no financial risk to Olympus, whereas buying SPA tokens directly would be significant financial risk

tumblebumble buying on the open market would pose great financial risk with no way to ensure that we receive the treasury assets. Furthermore, given the liquidity, slippage would be very high such that only a relatively small % of tokens could be purchased at what would be profitable levels.

gemini to clarify, this is not an acquisition of Spartacus but a proposed takeover of the treasury. Spartacus would cease to operate if this were to go through. SPA holders would receive a significant premium to market while Olympus would receive the SPA treasury assets (Dai and FTM) at a discount - tantamount to a very large and profitable bond.

Another clarification - there is no management team; we are all members of the DAO.

8thwonder.eth is significantly in favor of this tender offer. It represents a strategic opportunity for OHM to make an accretive M&A play by buying a distressed protocol that needs daddy (OHM). This is the type of opportunity that makes technology M&A bankers in TardFi salivate - significant alpha for both parties. Should this deal go through, it would immediately increase the backing per OHM and bring in new OHMies - a win, win. I plan to publicly support this initiative and applaud the team on pursuing a gigabrain investment opportunity. It's time to eat a protocol OHMies for fun and profit.

We will vote our 58 gOHM in favor of the OIP - HODLers rejoice

JaLa I understand that, but my point is that the only reason we are interested in them is to get their treasury at a deep discount (unless there’s some other reason; again the proposal doesn’t really mention anything else meaningful). So we should structure a deal that accomplished what we want, and not provide all these sweeteners that eat into the value. And we really want this treasury we likely will have to purchase a good chunk of SPA to force the deal down their throats. We would of course acquire those tokens strategically and not in a single slippage riddled transaction.

tumblebumble open to other suggestions on deal structure. A group in the dao with experience in these matters considered many structures and believed this to be optimal but that doesn't mean there is no room to improve. This should be a community-driven and iterative process.

JaLa Understood. I think dropkickdarren above was asking the right questions if we were to proceed along the lines of this proposal.

But this initial proposal raises another issue for me that goes to the heart of OIP-80 and making proposals to forks generally. I know we think that these forks and their holders would act rationally and recognize that we’re proposing—a premium over token price but a discount from treasury market value—is the best they can possibly hope for out of the fork whether they take the deal or not. But in significant part we’re dealing with “HODL” and “WAGMI” mentality that may prevent most if not all of these offers from being accepted. Maybe a friendly fork (like Umami) would be amenable to terms like this, but from what I’ve observed, every other fork thinks that we suck and that they’re doing all the right things, and it’s just a matter of time before they make it and we don’t.

this is my long way of saying that I think we may need to take a more Gordon Gekko approach to acquiring discounted treasuries from certain forks.

Let’s buy their treasury for less than it’s worth. Easy game!