Support Ohmieswap

Chauloko

this is a good post.. I really think point 1 is very important and something that we're trying to do too quickly.

First we had bonds. Now we sell bonds. We're now working on finding ways to utilise our treasury. We're now working on ways to incubate / seed projs that benefit OHM.

Those are 4 things, 2 which are basically brand new. Now is not the time to try to become a DEX. Let's do those first points very well, become market leaders in them and defend our position as the leader in these categories. Once we're more established and reputable in these areas, I believe we can throw around our weight a bit more and consider multiple avenues/revenue streams and inroads, but for now what we are doing is plenty.. I worry about talent dilution & loss of focus (trying to do 10 things well = doing nothing well) let's do these 4 I mentioned and see where we're at as far as bandwidth.

I also don't get good vibes from the OP poster, whereas for every other proposal I was thinking this is great. I voted NGMI.. okay cool poll.. ok well yeah I'm ngmi I guess

@ChefOmi thanks for taking the time to lay this out and speak more to the needs for a DEX for OlympusDAO.

As I understand it, the SushiSwap choice is due to the robustness of their smart contracts. With over $6.7B TVL (as of 11/3), SushiSwap has proven to be an industry leader for security and throughput.

It is quicker and cheaper deployment than building a DEX built from scratch. These contracts have gone through multiple audits and has held large amounts of capital without fail. A fork itself, the code follows much of Uniswap V2 with a modified UI/UX. This UI could be an exciting opportunity for branding for Ohmieswap.

In addition, Sushi has a robust treasury, prone to partnerships in DeFI. It would be a worthwhile consideration proposing a treasury swap, diversifying both treasuries, and adding SUSHI as a pair for liquidity pools.

This could be an interesting way to legitimize the project and attract new users from the SushiSwap ecosystem and beyond.

My only concern is the fee. 10% is gargantuan in crypto.

By keeping levels this high, it leaves room for new entrants to create a cheaper model. We hope you can adjust this fee structure and give more back to the community. In the industry, there will soon be a race to the bottom in fees.

We are excited to see more developments and integrations of OHM and partnerships throughout the wider DeFi community.

Wartull Wholly agree with this, we need to support projects that use OHM so that OHM usage increases, and this is a great first step towards becoming a digital reserve currency.

I'm also wondering @ChefOmi if you lend 1 OHM for 1 sOHM, how do you deal with potential IL since it will be pooled in order to avoid defaulting the loan?

Instead of OhmieSwap, what about potentially white-labelling a DEX, and having them set it up/run it? Olympus has great insights into bonding, hence the current success of Olympus Pro. We can take the same stance and let a team with solid DEX management and experience build and refine our DEX, while we pay a small amount to them. This would allow us to use the treasury for accelerating the development and provide real market value faster.

Should try to use Sushi to achieve the more important goals of use as router currency, the assumption of ETH being too hard to unseat as a default pair on Sushi is a poor one.

Wartull

I agree with this. it's definitly a good thing that ChefOmi or any other community members want to make contribution to OlympusDAO. This may produce great benefits, but no harm. As for liquidity migration, it's up to the decision of OlympusDAO.

davoice321

A great post mirroring many of my own thoughts on the subject.

I'd like to know why the team has not yet weighed in on this topic on the forum to give their view

for POL in general, right idea imo but…

would not want to implement in the short term (though i voted gmi but not without reservations), ohm's goal as reserve currency does align with eventually having ohm/x pairs, i foresee it being akin to stablecoin pair dominance on CEX but fully decentralised

this needs to be treated carefully and slowly, and not as a meme or with hype, ohm doesnt need hype. side note: ohmieswap as a name is a turnoff for me, such a project is not for ohmies but for a wider base of non-ohmies to use.

Other ohm pairs on sushi and other dex's first, at some point in the next 2-5 years this can materialise with full support of the community, this is how long it should take for such an idea to fully mature

I share a lot of the hesitation expressed here.

Regarding community, it seems quite possible that nay saying oly forks and then forking sushi might be a bad look. Our argument, as I understand it is, that forking should bring a value add, to avoid 0 sum games. How would this sushi fork bring any value to the sushi community?

And bootstrapping liquidity for the project, remuneration for participating in bootstrapping, etc are interesting questions. If they're bootstrapping themselves and this project isn't associated with the Olympus DAO, then I suppose this post is more about community buy in?

For an apples to apple comparison, does anyone have any insight into what the 14m LP fees haul would've looked like on this proposed DEX?

I also want to echo, forking code doesn't equate to running anything successfully. The liquidity pools, trust, audits, website maintenance, bug fixes, etc are, in aggregate, daunting.

I think as a protocol we should really come together especially in the beginning to think about the implications/efficacy of an idea like this. Mistakes can feel punishing in this space and I really wonder if this is where valuable developer attention should be, forking SUSHI to create a DEX that uses OHM as a base pair, giving me BNT vibes + rivaling ETH, which I believe may be the most paired asset (assumption.)
The difference between our own DEX and SUSHI could be quantified by calculating just how much fees we would have gotten from an OHM-ETH swap on our DEX, compared to OHM-ETH swap on SUSHI right? Correct me if I am wrong here. Do we think this + projected volume makes this worth the expense, now?
It also feels like majority of OSX holders will be OHM holders and in some way this is siloing liquidity that could have otherwise just went to more OHM. For Olympus to be holding a majority of OSX feels similar to Olympus holding a majority of OHM, and we don't.
Just looking to express some thoughts, I've not put enough time thinking about this tbh.
For now I don't feel like this is a priority and could be put off for further thought and development. I'd like to propose that we focus our attention towards getting on L2/Arbitrum/Optimism ASAP and release protocol upgrades like V2, which would make bonding a lot more appealing and rewarding. Maybe we can even improve upon bond features for OlympusPro involving our partners. Example being ALCX-ETH bonds vest ALCX for a user over 7 days and the entire ALCX gets staked immediately at time of sale, and won't be claimable until full escrow period is up? Or, if we were on Optimism, create inverse synthetic sOHM which could allow for hedging price exposure?

Love this: "We will engage the debt functions in the treasury to allow users to leverage sOHM for pooled OHM. This will be explained in more detail in a different post but in practice, you as a staker would be able to take 1 sOHM, borrow 1 OHM against it, and pool that 1 OHM with another token on Ohmieswap. You keep your rebases and new OHM liquidity is created. (win, win)." WAGMI! <3 and Peace Love Union and Respect!

The concept looks very interesting.

我是我

100% support this! Sushi was extremely close to being bought by wonderland a few weeks back and their team seems a bit shaky these days. An ohm centric amm would be amazing but maybe think about adjusting the kitchen fees to no more than 3.3%?