There's something that I don't understand about the argument that GSR would have no skin in the game. Maybe I'm wrong here (and I welcome the correction if so, can never learn enough) but in order to use the OHM in a MM situation GSR would need to pair it with other coins or tokens, and provide the other portion of the LP themselves.

From where I sit, that means that they are on the line for impermanent loss. And they also have a loan that they have to either return (or exercise their purchase options) on top of that. How is it that this is considered a freeride? The total sum of assets at risk of IL that they expose in the LP would be the same amount as the total for the loan at the time of issue.

So, unless I am missing something, they are essentially risking as much capital as the DAO. This is not a rhetorical statement: If anybody has an explanation of why this is not the case I would love to read it.

    KO-XD XD"#p5463 just to be clear, on a DEX the liquidity provider collects trading fees, but the very business model of a CEX is that they collect fees. GSR will not only not collect trading fees, but actually pay transaction fees to the exchange (we do typically have preferential rates from being one of the largest traders in the market, but we still net pay). We take care of those, none of those costs are passed down to OlympusDAO

    meditator most other protocols do really, actually I would argue that most pay for it as a lot of centralized exchanges will charge them listing fees. Olympus relied on DeFi and so managed to grow organically, to a point where many exchanges now will want to list you for free, it's a great spot to be at.

    Kazuya1987 to be clear OHM is already listed on Gate.io and MEXC to cite 2 centralized exchanges, it just has not benefited as much from those listings due to low volume there. While waiting to increase the DAO could make sense, in the interim those listings might happen regardless, and then you miss on the opportunity they present in terms of marketing and adoption, due to poor liquidity and messaging.
    We also want to again highlight that we will use our own balance sheet on the bid, and pay the centralized exchanges' transaction fees. Market Making digital tokens is what we do at GSR, and it is a business, and it is complex, it involves managing your inventory across venues in real time, integrating with different exchange tech, showing tight bids and offers in decent size and around the right price, making sure prices do not diverge between both centralized and decentralized exchanges, being present in the market 95% of the time, 24/7/365, and understanding how your liquidity moves with the overall crypto market and potentially macro market. GSR has almost 200 people spread across the globe, constantly monitoring and adjusting our algorithms and working to provide our clients and partners with the best possible service.
    As you can see, we are not just showing up and taking a loan of OHM to do with as we please, we will leverage this loan so once OHM gets on a centralized exchange, the trading experience is reflective of a project of that caliber and ambition.

            alexk1d because that's their business model… market makers make money from trading fees/spreads, not appreciation of the underlying security

              Very concerned at the amount of aimless positive feedback there is for this policy. This is a broken proposal. Whoever wrote this proposal masking it under a "loan" is incompetent and took one from Jerome Powell's book of reinventing a word's meaning. This is not a loan. We are giving away equity at a negative interest rate AND providing free call options on top of this. The Cex market is something we have not wanted to enter from the beginning and rightfully so as it gives exchanges massive leverage in the DAO. Zeus mentioned that pOhm was one of his biggest regrets because of the leverage it gave single entities….now we want to do this all over again with CEX's. So many holes in the proposal VOTE NO. This is asinine.

                Couldn't we simplify this a bit and instead of pricing in the purchase amount 6-12 months from now, just give GSR the option to buy at market value at those dates? It's possible that in 6-12 months the prices they have laid out is higher than market, but it's also possible that they are below market. Seems much more simple to say you have the right to purchase in 6-12 months at current market value, and potentially much more fair both to the upside and low side. I imagine the community would be pretty upset if GSR purchased at an insane discount in 6 months.

                melloone I also worry about this. I just don't think it's necessary atm, and I do agree that this certainly appears to be "negative interest rate AND providing free call options on top of this." I don't know enough about centralized market making to know if this is "business as usual," but it seems strange. I proposed that if we do vote "yes," can't we simply have a call option at market value, which would simplify things quite a bit, but perhaps this should be expanded to market value + interest rate accrued over the proposed period. I would not be happy if GSR purchased all of that OHM at a discount to the market.

                  Wartull

                  Legal in what jurisdiction? There has been no clarity about who is signing the documents on our end, and what country this deal is taking place in. Operating off of good faith works until it does not work. Future deals taking place like this are poor by design as we are a DAO. You are not giving enough weight to the situation where terms of the deal are broken/unclear to where they are not followed up on(similar to the LOBIS deal). The lack of clarity in this deal reeks with the same lack of clarity provided by LOBIS in where it was not mentioned that the airdrop would only go to those who voted yes for certain proposals. Bitcoin was made in part because agreed upon legal deals failed those involved.

                  Chauloko

                  GSR does not have to pair the OHM with any other tokens on a CEX. Most CEX's use a synthetic orderbook where tokens are kept in custody and only moved if a user withdraws their tokens. Fee's on CEX's are determined by the individual CEX and rates vary among MM's.

                  gsr_nyc

                  Again with no doubt you guys are one of the best and most reputable MM's in the space, and the reduced trading fees on CEX's is an advantage to having GSR as an MM. The crux of the issue is you guys are asking for 25k OHM in which is value our treasury that could use for token swaps with other DAO's or new ventures via our VC arm. I frankly find it hilarious that this deal has made it this far being that you guys are literally asking for free money to make fees off of and admit it. This benefits GSR receives out of this deal immensely outweigh the benefits Olympus DAO gets. Olympus DAO loses 25k OHM and future opportunity cost, GSR gains 25k OHM and future trading fees generated by your manipulation of the OHM price.

                  melloone

                  Agree with this 100%

                          Anti-GSR ppl aren’t seeing the value of Olympus getting to set the terms

                          We don’t want CEX doing it themselves with gOHM.

                          Don’t you see?

                            bone I’m baffled at this. Any CEX setting their own terms would be better terms for Ohm then what we are setting ourselves. We are literally paying them to list us when they could market buy and do it themselves at the benefit of the protocol. So ser exactly what is your point here?

                            • bone replied to this.

                                melloone

                                No because CEX using gOHM is very bad for v2. Imagine Binance and Coinbase voting for stuff with users’ funds. Olympus is setting a valuable precedent here.

                                25k ohm is tiny. Yea GSR will make profit but it will lead to more onboarding. Charging them interest when they’ve agreed not to stake is ridiculous.

                                  bone

                                  Who cares if a CEX buys gOHM on the open market? Just another whale IMO. You seem to not understand the difference between being given something and buying something. Also have you asked any ohmer if they think 25k OHM is a lot or a little OHM yet? Average wallet has about 3-4 total OHM in it…

                                  • bone replied to this.

                                      KO-XD

                                      Be sure to listen in on discord:

                                      Today we will hold our daily community call at **3pm EST/8pm UTC/9pm CET!** Topics which will be discussed are some organisational changes wrt community management, OIP 54 and the GSR proposal on the forum!

                                        Listened in to today's AMA. Thank you for the professionalism and the respect shown to our community. Like Zeus and Wartul said, whether we like it or not, cex listing is incoming. We'd better anticipate and prepare for it in advance. I'm all for this proposal. Olympus has really matured. I'm so excited for our shared future at hohme.

                                        While I know the topic of people holding ohm on CEX's receiving staking has been brought up plenty, but I think maybe it hasn't been high lit the amount of hype that that might drive. In defi, 1,000% APY is considered small… having spent time in the crypto subreddit, people are hyped about staking ALGO and getting 5% APY. If we roll in there with a thousand percent? It will literally melt faces.

                                        we'd be looking at the insane rewards available in defi, without having to wade through fishy links, scammy dms, seed phrases, sending coins to contract addresses… It would just be people with their FDIC insured custodial wallets clicking 'buy' on our coin, and making 100x the reward of the next highest staking coin. Olympus might have trouble in defi keeping people from chasing high APYs, but we would be a godsend to 50 million? 100 million? more? CeX users that have never heard the word 'fork'. They would buy until there are no more to buy.

                                        the first DAO to do this wins.

                                        Listened to the AMA. My main concern is keeping governing power out of the hands of CEX and any other kind of centralized authority. This deal can help with that, so I'm cautiously optimistic. Looking forward to the next discussion on this once the details are ironed out.

                                        gsr_nyc

                                        GSR -- Gate and MECX are shitcoin exchanges and it is irrelevant OHM is listed on there.. no one is going to get burned with that process.

                                        I open market bought myself into a top 1% wallet v the firm who is arguing for this being a good thing knowing full well they can't lose (you truly cant lose here let's call a spade a spade).. this is where we stand. I hope people reading this can figure out who might have more incentive alignment with their bags here. I respect that you provide a service, but what I am trying to tell you is it's not needed yet (my 2c, just 1 person in this DAO) and perhaps at a later day.

                                        I have conviction and have poured bandwidth/time/money into this DAO (both keeping myself on top of how it works + helping ppl in discord and explaining the nuances of the protocol) your firm isn't even willing to buy in (buy gOHM) with skin in the game to make this happen.. of course not, specifically because it doesnt actually matter how the token performs as your incentives are just fee abritrage and onto the next 1 (and there are hundreds ofc) when it's no longer in your financial incentive to spend anymore time doing this.. mine are aligned with actually building something useful here and I am actually risking significant capital to push the vision forward. And at this stage doing this is just alarm beds ringing in my head. When we vote on this I just ask for an option of revisiting CEX exchanges in the future, I am pro-CEX exchanges, just not before multichain and not before we're much more developed as a DAO.. another 3-6 months minimum IMO

                                          I listened to the AMA yesterday, and while there are concerns that were not spoken to. I think the question we have to ask ourselves is how much control do we want with what comes next?

                                          We are a top 50 token, that's a huge accomplishment, it also means that CEX listing is going to happen and soon.

                                          The DAO gets a much better result if we are in the drivers seat showing the CEXs we are serious and telling them the best way to get OHM to the masses. If we wait for them to figure it out and they are going to come up with their own plan for how this will work and its not going to be as favorable to us. To work with CEXs we need a market maker partner.

                                          GSR has gone out of their way to engage with the DAO, in an industry that the standard is secrecy they have stated many if not all of their motives and intentions.

                                          We need to partner with an MM who is interested in engaging with the community and willing to insert terms into the contract which we are concerned about. The next best option is rolling the dice and hoping one of the 7-8 MMs we have already engaged will come around before an actor we have no control over does this without us.

                                          I understand that giving them an interest free $16-20mm is a lot of money, but its such an asymmetric bet. We risk not getting interest or whatever on$ 20mm of OHM with the upside of a $13B+ market cap in just 6 months? I would take that bet all day.

                                          GSR's and our interests are largely aligned, the next actor could be anything. So I am bullish on this as long as the core team which has been researching this from the beginning is comfortable with the terms of the contract.

                                          Speaking of which, I want to say a big thank you to the team for all your work here, @Wartull I know you have been leading the charge and I am glad you are on it.

                                          1 GSR doesnt make spring. Don't expect too much from it.

                                          The strength of OHM will continue to be what it always have been. Giga brains, DAO, community.

                                          In favour of the proposal.

                                          Another thing that was being discussed in the Discord is this:

                                          The bottom line is that 80-90% of people will not go out of their way to get into DeFi. They won't leave their CEX. They will not learn to use MetaMask, and how to operate with DEXs, all of this. Call it lazy or whatever you want but this system is not really user friendly and we are all a bunch of degens willing to put up with it because of the gains to be had. I know what everybody here thinks, because I am on the same boat: "Not your keys, not your coins", "Centralized authorities suck, that is not the point of DeFi", large etcetera. This is all true. But that does not change that fact: Most people in crypto are operating within a CEX, they feel comfortable there. I know a few, I've recommended OHM to them, and they simply will not buy anything outside of their exchange. I'm sure that story rings a bell for some or most of you. We can stay DeFi purists and have a "If you build it they will come" approach or we can go to them. If Olympus wants to be a top 10 or top 5 project, we need those people as part of the market cap.

                                          What happens on say, Coinbase, if suddenly a new option shows up for people with the possibility of staking and an APY of 1k? Most options on CEX regarding interest rates and what not don't go over 10% APY. DeFi has very little presence, with "conservative" options like cDAI or similar stuff. The Olympus model would be incredibly attractive by comparison. We think nothing of our 7k APY because of the sheer revolution that this model has created, with insane APYs available on forks. We forget how massive this is compared to TradFi or DeFi 1.0. Olympus is in a great position to completely disrupt that game as the original project with this model in a CEX, as it did with DeFi… if it gets listed first.

                                          Olympus is the leading project of the Olympus model (Duh!) but there are forks out there, and I wonder what happens if one of them gets listed within a CEX with the option to stake before OHM. I think the first project of this type to get listed in a CEX is going to win a massive advantage in terms of volume and market cap. That project has to be Olympus. 20m is a lot but the bet is very asymmetrical IMO. We just need to figure out a way to ensure that centralized entities stay out of governance.

                                          I see the main point of this as us being proactive on an unavoidable CEX listing to have our own terms and avoid centralized exchanges having governance power. I support this proposal.