• General
  • RFC - Swap between Redacted DAO and Olympus DAO

Summary:

Swap Olympus DAO’s BTRFLY holdings and all future vesting for $3.75mm in gOHM from Redacted DAO (“Redacted”).

Motivation:

Since its inception, Redacted and Olympus have enjoyed strong collaboration and cooperation. Over time, however, the strategic missions of the protocols have diverged. As such, in the spirit of cooperation, we believe the swap will be mutually beneficial, allowing further consolidation of the Olympus treasury while simplifying Redacted’s token vesting and token structure.

Proposed Terms:

  • gOHM Price: $2,850

  • Total gOHM sent to Olympus from Redacted: 1,315.8

  • Total BTRFLY sent to Redacted from Olympus: 5,429.23

  • Cancellation of future Olympus vesting in Redacted

  • Mutual release of all claims against the respective DAOs, contributors, multisigs,...

Execution:

A vote in favor of this proposal supports these dependent actions of Redacted and from Olympus:

1a/ Redacted DAO will terminate all future vesting of BTRFLY to Olympus DAO immediately upon proposal passing.

1b/ Redacted DAO will make a payment to Olympus DAO in gOHM tokens, equal to 790 gOHM tokens at a fixed price of $2,850 USD per gOHM immediately upon proposal passing.

2a/ Olympus DAO will pay Redacted DAO all of the unlocked BTRFLY in its possession, equal to at least, 2629.78 BTRFLY(78.38 in wallet and 2,551.40 unlocked rlBTRFLY) immediately upon proposal passing.

2b/ Redacted DAO will make a further payment to Olympus DAO in gOHM tokens, equal to 245 gOHM tokens at a fixed price of $2,850 USD per gOHM immediately upon receipt of the tokens aforementioned in (2a).

3a/ Olympus DAO will send all of the unlocked BTRFLY in its possession to Redacted DAO at each subsequent payment date, with payment dates being at a minimum two Payment Dates:

   On September 30, 2023 for at least 2,641 BTRFLY

   On November 15, 2023 for all remaining BTRFLY

3b/ Redacted DAO will make a pro-rata payment to Olympus DAO of the remaining 280.8 gOHM, relative to the portion of total outstanding BTRFLY sent by Olympus DAO at each 'Payment Date' specified in 3a. These payments from Redacted DAO will occur within 3 days of Olympus DAO corresponding payments of BTRFLY.

This proposal will not go into effect unless the Redacted governance also approves of this agreement (Link).

The purpose of these mutual snapshot votes is to settle any potential disputes between Redacted and Olympus. The cancellation of the vesting for Olympus and a symmetric release of claims against Redacted is sufficient consideration for this release of claims against Olympus. Failure to complete any of the steps above will void this agreement.

Poll:

For: In favor of swap + cancel vesting
Against: Against swap + cancel vesting

If there is sufficient support, we will move to OIP in 48 hours.

Proceed with the Swap with Redacted DAO

This poll has ended.

dr00 given we're swapping a treasury asset for it, I presume it would become part of non-circulating gOHM and therefore increase backing - much like when we buy OHM w treasury DAI as part of RBS.

Fully supportive of this RFC, will be voting in favor in both Olympus & Redacted snapshots.

dr00 Think of it 3.57M inverse bond. If passed this proposal should work to remove 352K+ OHM from circulation and increase liquid backing by ~2%.

Fully support this as part of cooler implementation

Sure, I just wanted to see it written and acknowledged by the DAO. In the past we have done initiatives such as OHM Bonds and were told by legal counsel that we should not burn it, then there was internal discussion over what the DAO should do to re-purpose that OHM, so I think it's important to have that spelled out. I'm somewhat torn between burning OHM vs just taking it off the balance sheet. The former is absolute, the latter can be changed on a whim. Inverse bonds actually burn, where activities like this don't necessarily burn unless we make it happen.

Totally in support of the goal is to increase backing though.

Talking with hOHMward, I was wondering if perhaps we could spend a little development resources building a custom escrow script (smart contract) around the proposed deal terms and have it programatically burn the gOHM as part of the contract code?

This would alleviate the legal concerns around centralized burning as opposed to something like RBS that is programatic.

    dr00

    Hey dr00! I submitted a suggestion very similar to this in the comments here:

    https://forum.olympusdao.finance/d/3756-towards-a-fully-autonomous-olympus/6

    I think something could be structured to help clean up supply and minimize operational overhead. @Jem had a ask that aligned with it as well.

    Ultimately, it's programmatically getting the OHM drawn into a contract that can burn the supply rather than just accounting for it. We've done both because human burning OHM ad-hoc was frowned upon but Smart Contract burning OHM cause of code is okay.

    Write a Reply...