EconomistBeard If the answer to this is no, it's a clear example of executive decision making at the expense of informed community consensus. That would mean an immediate "no" vote from me and I would encourage my fellow OHMies to do the same.

      Hello sers gsr_nyc - I am sure there will be good answers but I have a few questions below you might help with:

      Is GSR committed to only dealing with exchanges and not OTC?

      If OTC is available - doesn't this open up a huge attack vector for shorting?

      What's to stop GSR from selling OTC and the recipient staking?

      Wouldn't exchanges prefer gOHM?

          muh9s indeed sir, OHM in treasury, OHM in MM. Same same. It is inflating away, let us put it to work and get people into the fold

            Zeus But on the matter of CEXs just using sOHM, we have no means to stop them from crossing the bridge into gOHM, do we?

            • Zeus replied to this.

                Mark11 Actually I think OTC will be in the best interest of the project, especially if you can match sellers with buyers and minimize downward pressure this way. OTC buyers would be no different than buying from Sushi.

                  Jawesome I saw that after it posted, doing this on mobile lol

                  I'll hold out for review of the agreement and the AMA. Would be good to see the formal agreement prior to the AMA, though.

                    Zeus Then we need to actively start thinking about way we can potentially limit centralised institutions and their governance power in the DAO. Objectively, this is great for OHM but I have some genuine concerns where this can lead for our DAO.

                      OHM trading on centralized exchanges is pointless. There's no staking, governance, or the ability to borrow against. All this provides is another venue for people to short OHM, adding additional sell pressure compared to stakers just selling rebases.

                      To add, 25,000 OHM (~20mil at current prices) is excessive for market making. This amount is far more than most tokens need for the initial liquidity on exchanges.

                        Question for the big brains - how much additional liquidity does this proposal produce for Olympus? Is there a way to estimate / translate the 20m into liquidity pool terms for ease of comparison? eg. $1 with a market maker is equivalent to $5 in LP tokens, or similar. @gsr_nyc @Zeus

                          Algar that is an interesting question, while there is no exact answer as it depends on the price action itself, it is a significant multiplier that could be much higher than 5x. A sushi AMM is not very capital efficient as you provide liquidity across all possible prices while a centralized market maker will concentrate its ressources in a band around the current price.

                            To summarize what I take to be the dilemma: using sOHM seems preferable to using OHM in that we don't have to rely on a CEX to provide staking services, and sOHM does not itself confer governance power. But staking the DAO's OHM will reduce APY and lead to dilution of current stakers.

                            Seems that we need to run the numbers to determine just how much APY would be reduced by using sOHM. We would also need to change the terms of the repayment, as the amount of sOHM would grow over the period of the loan.

                            gsr_nyc may i know who is performing credit check on GSR? My company had interacted with GSR before. Even though they have been in the market for a while, iunderstand that their balance sheet is not as strong as major FIs. This was the reason why only a very small credit line (around USD 3 million) was given to them. I also saw quesion on interest rate that GSR will be paying for this borrowing. I will like to find out the terms of lending as well. I agree that if they want to be MM for OHM, they should buy and hold a substantial amount from the market. What olympus dao can do is to lend them ohm on last resort.. overnight or just for a short period of time. This reduces credit exposure to GSR. Keen to hear your thoughts and clarifications.

                            Lastly, again on a philosophy front, should we really get involved with traditional FIs? And if so, will this be the first and the last?

                              jft agree. Start with smaller amount first. And monitor GSR's performance if you like.