hOHMwardbound yes definitely! With our current structure it was always a no brainer to flip the model to allow the borrowers to dictate the terms as well. This is being done in a way where the borrower post a collateral while requesting the loan terms similarly to Cooler Loans, but then anyone could fill that in full or partially. Again, I would say that in Olympus case the lender posting the lend funds first might be a better alternative as it reduces operational overhead.
Don_G_Lover In theory we could but that is a decently time consuming process to generate a quality backtesting report. Given the team size we have that is an expensive endeavor.
woofwoof So as I understand it, the yield from the Alchemix self-repayment comes from the ARR, which would mean that your OHM collateral/loan position would be redeemed with OHM, rather than gOHM. This means that the inflationary yield accrues to OHM in the future, when you eventually recover it from the Alchemix vault. You can presumably swap and deposit alOHM-OHM to create up to 2x leverage, but the end result will be realized in future OHM (which by its nature does not inherently include the ARR).
In contrast, a Vendor pool would accept gOHM as collateral in exchange for DAI to be used now. This allows the borrower (community) to continue to realize the ARR inherent in the gOHM wrapper as well as to pay an interest rate to borrow DAI (and use that for whatever, including creating leverage by buying gOHM and borrowing more DAI - the maximum ratio will equal 1/(1-LTV), where LTV is set by the lender, in this case, the OHM treasury).
Does this make sense?
Great proposal. The deal between Incubator and Vendor fell through because of changes in the DAO and Incubator team specifically. The team and product at Vendor were viewed in a very favourable light by the Incubator team at the time.
I would personally love to see this proposal pass. $500K is a reasonable initial allocation.
@0xTaiga what would be a reasonable timeline for a mainnet launch for Vendor Finance?
My strong opinion is that we can bring forward a combined OIP and let the community vote on the two Clearing House options presented thus far - where we can pilot deposits (of some size) in both protocols, one or the other, or neither.
Don_G_Lover This was my opinion also. I believe Zeus has parked his however after he received clear feedback on audits and is looking at how he undertakes that so there may be delay on that option?
Don_G_Lover In our case we would need about a week to spin up on Ethereum in our current shape and form. It might take a bit longer if we decide to add the support for the delegation logic of OHM. We would need to contract the Olympus dev team to make sure we are aware of all the nuances and do not miss anything.
When does this move to snapshot. More utility!
We are currently waiting for the AMA to be scheduled before this goes to the snapshot.
Tuyệt vời
It was interesting!
