Thanks for your answer Shadow.
So what am trying to say, and sorry for not doing a good job at it, is that of course, $/vote is important, but you cannot see only that. If you just want to minimise your vote price, you can just bribe veBAL or vlAURA users. But the reason Olympus is considering acquiring AURA is to not have an expense, but more an investment, i.e. to make sure the treasury is not impacted by the governance activity of Olympus. I think it's very good to do so: I would prefer investing over expensing for sure, especially given this kind of returns/price.
However, what I am saying is that for such investment, Aura is not the best tool due to its inflationary nature, as indeed, you will have many votes, but your investment will progressively decrease in value.
Here is a napkin calculation of what I am trying to say:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/u/1/d/e/2PACX-1vTRh_Osb7qDXSN_lUZf-QAoAjPjvrEz7YyQzEWwMAOZHWzxM7KAo7OWGz8jKiC43QJpRC1jKh0gDqxu/pubhtml
Basically, on the first 16-week round, Olympus will lose from dilution around $150k on its principal investment. This will allow Olympus to get 142k veBAL votes for 16 weeks. If Olympus was willing to buy those 142k votes for 16 weeks through bribing, it would cost, at the current price of bribes ($0.05/vote.week) $113k, thus saving $37k (plus being flexible).
Therefore, if we are willing to use those $1m as a pocket of money to buy votes, we would be better of doing it via bribes. However, if we want to use those $1m as an investment pocket, we would be better off doing it through veBAL or sdBAL: we would have less voting power in the short term, but the position would be sustainable as it would not structurally decrease at this pace.
Hope you guys see what I am saying…
