This is a great proposal. But should be capped as the treasury should limit exposure on centralised stable coins (FRAX is 90%+ USDC) alUSD is 100% backed by DAI (which is 40%+ backed by USDC deposits)
if possible a partnership with Synthetic for sUSD is more of a decentralised option
been looking forward to this for a long time
Very good proposal Jala , im all for it , two great projects , essential for the whole industry , great achievement
In agreement!
Alchemix gives us future opportunity to have an alOHM vault which I would appreciate.
Great proposal! The Alchemix community seems aligned to ours and is one of the most promising in DeFi atm. I think both would benefit from more composability and both a strengthened treasury for OHM and buy pressure for Alchemix is beneficial.
homme Fair point, however Alchemix is going to introduce other collateral types like USDC and ETH. I suspect they'll cap debt of each collateral type, however there aren't any liquidations in their system in the conventional sense. I'm not that worried as long as there's diversification - the reason why MKR introduced USDC is to have a stable that wouldn't depeg as quickly in case of a major sell-off (like '20 March Black Thursday). While some people got burned because of the cheap CDP liquidations, I also think the crypto industry showed their resilience with their backstop initiative etc.
sUSD would be another great collateral type to bond against. We should organize a proposal for adding it. Note that it isn't very capital effecient because of the high C-Ratio, however many DeFi users will already have synths or staked SNX because of the rewards, so I'm sure it'd attract capital.
I am all for it.
I think this is a great idea and it has my support.
On first discussions with alUSD, I was a bit skeptical about OHM-alUSD bonds if we pursued a Sushiswap pool... but accumulating Curve pool tokens seems to be a really good idea. This is much more natural of a fit for the Treasury-as-a-service idea. The downsides as mentioned are incorporating exposure to centralized stablecoins like USDC/USDT. But it can also be viewed as getting exposure to Curve, since most of its value is in stablecoins.
sisyphus1337 Agreed on sUSD. I think after reviewing this proposal we should explore the liquidity source that Synthetix most values for sUSD. For my previous proposal I had been thinking along the lines of OHM-DAI bonds for OHM-sUSD SLP tokens. But this proposal makes me think it could be more useful if we accumulated the sUSD-DAI/USDC/USDT pool tokens on Curve. These tokens also accrue 1.9% SNX rewards btw
fantastic synergy move. Love both projects and it makes sense
Agreed, great idea
Agreed. Let's do this.
as a delegate of the Titanium Reinforced Graphene Nanotube Composite ADAMANTIUM hands, I am all FOR this proposal. LETS DO IT
I love this idea. I think it's a great synergy between two awesome protocols. If Olympus is able to bond enough LP and create a strong floor of liquidity, that would be super valuable for Alchemix. On the flip side, Olympus gets trading fees, a diverse set of stables, and a diverse set of governance tokens to add to its treasury. If this is successful, it could be done with future curve pools like alETH/ETH and alBTC/BTC which would increase the diversity, fees, and rewards of Olympus' DAO and lock up a lot of liquidity for Alchemix. Another great win-win.
Great proposal Ja.
heck yeah for it. Good to get some ALCX(future rev. stream)
100% support alchemix is awesome
I'm strongly against this at this point in time.
The more popular ALCX gets, the longer its loans will take to pay off. A product in crypto shouldn't get worse as it grows in popularity. Everyone using it is fighting over the same yield.
alUSD is not equal to $1 over long time frames. When the transmuter makes you wait to get dai, that means your alUSD was not actually worth $1. That could be a problem for OHM given certain market conditions.
bone Everyone using it is fighting over the same boosted yield*.
The yields approach that of the underlying yield aggregator over time. This boosted yield should just be viewed as a bonus IMO.
I am for this proposal.
What