A couple of questions:

1. Can we get transparency on which specific members will be primarily driving these internal decisions?

2. While I hope we can stay on the happy path of up only in this market or having very small drawdowns, nothing is guaranteed. I see that you somewhat call out "the cost basis of our strategic assets must be less than 33% of the RFV of our Treasury" as one risk mitigation strategy, but can you also elaborate more on why this is an appropriate upper bound (besides the meme), as well as other risk mitigation strategies the team has come up with (for example, maybe reduce further bear risk if X token sees a Y% drop within a day).

3. What is the minimum threshold after which the team will reveal the asset(s) that it has accrued (could it be as simple as "we have acquired enough for now")? I see this was addressed in an earlier comment, where the team will only acquire assets from a bag of approved assets.

4. Could there be cases where the team acquires assets initially only to sell them before revealing what those assets were? I feel like since such a case can exist, will there be transparency on what the assets were and why we backed out on certain assets? Addressed after answering question (3) above.

5. What will the process look like if, after a while, the treasury team decides to reduce exposure to certain assets?

    json

    I think I personally would find it beneficial to understand what this internal framework involves before moving this OIP to a snapshot.

      I'm supportive of the OIP. The aspiration behind most of the whitelist is pretty clear. Eg. we should have an interest in the gov tokens of the stables we mint against.

      Just want to add 5 cents for caution.

      Investing the treasury into (eth) dapps/DAOs should be compared to just increasing ETH or staked ETH backing as a passive strat. The test of diversification is if these gov tokens outperform ETH in the long run (dividends + price), since we do take additional risk with them, the stable coin banks excluded.

      Fairly strong argument to be made a 'central bank' should just stay passive in their exposure. In crypto I think that means the native token as an index, since it does benefit from all the activity under it.

      Just something to track like a hawk (eth vs strategic portfolio performance).

      For further managing risk we'd have to hold other platform native tokens. Understandably we are not there yet other than what was already decided with wBTC.

      GM, I like it in principle but have a few questions.

      What's driving your conviction that now is the time to diversify?

      How would governance power be exercised in new organisations? What's the mechanism and how will it remain an open process?

      Then to flip the front-running / privileged info argument on it's head, what would happen if we were to release the info in advance prior to purchase - let's say to buy e.g. ETH?

      There could then be a closed / blind vote by Ohmies about whether the ETH market price [reflected post announcement] represents value, where no one knows outcome or the current vote swing. The outcome of the vote then triggers the purchase to be made / not made.

      OR maybe some other mechanism could work?

      Thnx

      • json replied to this.

        Definitely support this proposal.

        It will sound like a boomer comment….. but we should add YFI on this list too.

        smartboy21 how does this relate to LOBI? I agree with this idea but is this because OHM wants to exclude governance tokens? It seems I should sell my LOBI

        • json replied to this.

            hekman same thing worries me, growth is good but who makes the decisions and what keeps them from  front-running the DAO themselves, could be very similar to the insider trading that happened with NFTs on OpenSea

            • json replied to this.

                As the reserve asset, it's critical to grow and diversify the Treasury into strategic assets. Perfectly aligned with the mission and agree that these are solid tokens to acquire. Let's do it!

                kombu_takana

                1. The treasury, partnerships and policy team along with key strategic advisors (i.e tetra).
                2. This only frees up to 33% of the RFV, this does not mean we will cap this at all times. Especially because if the token continues to grow then we cannot do anything further until the RFV catches up. We feel 33% of RFV is minimal enough to mitigate any great impact to the overall protocol and gives us the ability to monitor the performance as we allocate bond capacity to it. Keep in mind this is mostly from bond revenue so it's not like we're spending our treasury/excess reserves. TLDR, we want enough to give us significant growth/protocol influence but not so much so that we become over exposed in any one asset.
                3. Reductions will be discussed internally and announced following the decision. The idea is that we want to allocate some bond capacity to allow for flexibility when farming. This is immensely beneficial since there are multiple moves we want to make within the next weeks that it would take many weeks/months to do proposals and discussions for each one to the community. Also, there will be treasury reports in which we can talk about our decisions.

                    okthen We can utilize the ETH for various farming strategies like ribbon, lido, rocket pool, etc.

                      DegensArcade All of the assets we will be targeting will always go for public vote, we will not be targeting assets that are not approved by the community. Additionally, the majority if not all of the assets we will be targeting will be acquired via bonding which is more so a DCA method of accrual. Meaning, if you see a new bond that we announce and it's one of the strategic assets then everyone has a fair chance at purchasing.

                          Agent8 We are still working closely with LOBI, however, they're targeting majority governance tokens. We won't do this for various reasons such as growing our RFV treasury and LP positions with OHM. We do have a sizeable treasury now that we should utilize to grow, otherwise we will have hundreds of millions of dollars just sitting. With that said, we can make strategic decisions on specific assets to accrue via bonding that will bring a lot of utility to the coming projects and OHM ecosystem overall.