Summary

Pilot deposit of no more than $500,000 DAI each into Vendor Finance and MYSO Finance Clearing House facilities pending several pre-conditions:

  • Vendor Finance will deploy their system to mainnet & provide a code review with OlympusDAO engineering teams

  • MYSO Finance will deploy their system to mainnet & provide a code review with OlympusDAO engineering teams

  • Cooler Loans is out of scope of this governance proposal. We will await a follow-up directly from Zeus regarding the audit before moving forward with a proposal.

Motivation

Per Zeus:

Lending has historically been a sore spot for Olympus. Rari Fuse stands out as the glaring example — Ohmies were plagued with unreasonably high interest rates and expensive & restrictive liquidation proceedings. This is especially nonsensical in the current environment, where OHM trades at/near/below backing and offers significantly more liquidity relative to supply than other, more lent to tokens like ETH, CRV, and others. Even now, we see little to no available liquidity on the two primary options (Vesta and Fraxlend), and high interest rates on Fraxlend. We can do better.

The Clearing House facility is a novel method for our treasury to deploy capital in an efficient way.  The two groups below propose different approaches to similar problems:

https://forum.olympusdao.finance/d/1821-rfc-clearing-house-partnership-with-vendor-finance

https://forum.olympusdao.finance/d/1905-rfc-clearing-house-partnership-with-myso-finance 

Per Vendor:

We have been working with UMAMI Finance to polish this concept and we are familiar with many edge-cases that are not immediately obvious. Umami DAO has been lending with Vendor out of their treasury and has made a consistent 40% APR. Currently they are lending $100k and taking a measured approach to lending. So far they have been satisfied with the service and we greatly value them as our partner. Please see their treasury report to learn more: https://blog.umami.finance/umami-finance-treasury-update-december-2022/

Per MYSO:

We’ve added a script to backtest various pool parameterizations, which is open source and can be found here: https://github.com/mysofinance/notebooks/blob/main/olympus-dao-myso_v_1_1-backtest/olympus-dao-myso_v_1_1-simulation.ipynb For the above mentioned initial pool parameterization, the pool would’ve returned a RoI of 7.8% for the backtesting period from 2022-03-01 to 2023-01-16. The backtest was run with similar assumptions to the ones found in the previous mentioned alternative proposals. The MYSO Finance team is happy to provide additonal backtests on demand.

Proposal

Pilot deposit of no more than $500,000 DAI each into Vendor Finance and MYSO Finance Clearing House facilities pending several pre-conditions:

  • Vendor Finance will provide:

    • Mainnet deployment
    • Code review with OlympusDAO engineering
  • MYSO Finance will provide:

    • Mainnet deployment

    • Code review with OlympusDAO engineering

Polling Period

Poll will begin now and end in 5 days.

Poll

  • Approve $500k pilot deposit into each protocol

  • Approve $500k to Vendor Finance (mainnet)

  • Approve $500k to MYSO Finance

  • Do not approve

How do we proceed?

This poll has ended.

    It was really great talking to these two teams. The community did their due diligence and asked GREAT questions to both teams on our Community AMAs.

    If you are torn on whether to support this initiative, I encourage you to listen to these teams:

    Vendor AMA: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mC8HomcYRBQ

    Myso AMA: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vPlABUy_6Wg

    Thanks for putting together this TAP. Y'all have my confidence vote!

      Thank you very much for this proposal! We are excited to see things coming together! We have also completed a main-net deployment and are doing internal testing as we speak. We are also open to walk the Olympus Dev team over our code base and setup at the time of their convenience.

      Best,

      Vendor Team

      Thank you both dr00 and Don_G_Lover for your support and trust in setting this up - this is greatly appreciated.

      As you may know, MYSO is already deployed on Ethereum mainnet and we'd be delighted to provide the requested code review and guide you through the process.

      We're thrilled to move forward and once again, many thanks for your trust.

      Best regards, the MYSO team

      Thanks to both these teams for their proposals and for excellent AMAs. (and @dr00 for running them!) I have confidence after that for us to run a $500k test with each.

      Please help Myso to reach its full potential

      Overall in favour of this proposal. Really like both protocols and think they add a lot of value to the econOHMy.


      One suggestion/request would be: Is it possible to split the Vendor pilot deposit across both Mainnet and Arbitrum?

      My argument being is that I believe there is a large population of Ohmies on Arbitrum in which funding a pool(s) on Vendor would be greatly beneficial for them. We all obviously know the excitement and hype surrounding Arbitrum currently and so I think for Olympus to start to grow a larger presence there it would further improve adoption and dispel the "Olympus is dead" perception (N.B. OHM is still ded).

      However, I am also aware of the risks with bridging treasury assets from Mainnet to Arbitrum and in general having treasury assets "all over the place" (i.e. difficult to efficiently manage) (props to @Relwyn for the insightful discussions on this topic). As such I would understand if a straight 50/50 split across Mainnet and Arbitrum would not be a great idea. Therefore, I would instead propose something along the lines of:

      • $400k pilot deposit on Mainnet
      • $100k pilot deposit on Arbitrum

      I think this also provides an opportunity to better discover and understand where the demand is across two of, if not the two, most used networks.


      Personally I would prefer more of the Vendor deposit to be on Arbitrum; however, I am of course biased in this discussion as I pretty much exclusively operate on Arbitrum these days and such actions would greatly benefit me.

      As such, if a split were to be a possibility I would defer to those with less bias to propose the exact terms.


      Thanks for coming to my OHM Talk

        Joel33 Yo I responded in Discord but x-post:

        For simplicity of treasury interactions and the fact we're predominantly operated on mainnet, I'd like us to isolate this activity there.

        We do need the ability to recall/remove deposits and support RBS quickly so bridging would add a layer of complexity that probably doesn't merit the squeeze.

        it was really great talking to these two teams

        18 days later
        3 months later
        Write a Reply...