• General

  • Request for Comments - CEX Listing

I think we have to be really careful with making a step like this. As others have mentioned, it will be hard to relay our 3,3 message on a third party site.

I am definitely against custodial staking as this should be kept inhouse. I do see an opportunity in the bonding process being managed by a CEX or third party as this surely will increase the revenue of the treasury, however, whoever we partner with needs to work with our DAO to create the same message of 3,3 on their portal/site and I think that is where the problem lies.

I think the market will come to us, so any partnership we do agree on should be very lopsided in our favor!

Don_G_Lover I very much like the idea of having the CEXes bond in order to receive liquidity but would the protocol need to be altered in order to surpass the max amount of OHM that can be bonded? I would imagine the CEXes would want a good deal of liquidity. Depending on how many CEXes wish to provide liquidity what % of current liquidity would required to be bonded? I'd imagine CEXes wouldn't be interested in current bond discounts so the return for the protocol would definitely be lower. Would also imagine they would take some bps if they somehow incorporated direct bonding from the protocol.

The positives as you listed are there. Wider reach/faster growth but I think the price point of OHM bonds. Could maybe come to some sort of price agreement with CEX's based on past sushi fees and growth extrapolated out and compared to other first time CEX listings.

    No CEX before marriage.

    Marriage: CEX needs to deposit $1m of their own funds into OHM bonds - then offer sOHM as stablecoin.

    They never offer naked OHM.

    I'm drunk. This may not make sense.

      Don’t have too much time to write why I’m strongly against this for the short to mid term but my main arguments are:

      • We own the vast majority of our own pools, generating around a million a month in fees alone
      • CEX’s demand a lot of FREE liquidity, look at Alchemix for example who gave Gemini millions in ALCX
      • It would increase volatility since we would get a lot of people buying/selling ohm without being involved in our community/ecosystem ( staking/buying bonds)

        How will the CEX affect the staking APY and Bonds? Don’t most exchanges charge insane amounts of money to be listed? Would these CEXs be willing to stake a set amount of OHM for a locked period of time?

        It would be intriguing to see how a listing on a Gemini, BlockFi, or Celsius with their Interest accounts would look for someone staking Ohm on their platform.

        Agree that more details are needed.

        Will the CEXs that have large pools of Ohm stake it as sOhm themselves?

        How will bonds work?

        Will we lose out on fees going to CEX rather than the Olympus D?

        We should approach this from the perspective of 3, 3 of course. What will we all gain, and will this be a move for the short term or the long term?

        Another thing to consider: there seems to be some regulatory decisions on the horizon, between Elizabeth Warren demanding clarity from Gary Gensler by the 27th, and with the XRP ripple case yet to settle with the SEC. Becoming involved with a CEX before the dust on this settles could lead to complications.

        balotelli45 I was wondering the same thing. What prevents Coinbase from just buying a bunch and selling it? Do we have to do something for them? Do they guarantee to keep X amount of money or OHM for a X amount of time? Does listing mean we give them a discount? I need a lot more info first before voting. But gut feeling says NO. Wait a while and get some more assets under our belt so that we have more diversify portfolio and do other things like locked staking before doing this.

          It is too soon to go that way. Maybe later.

          Don_G_Lover

          I voted no. I see very big issues with cex , counterproductive to our utility, ( sohm on fuse)
          Im afraid pump and dumps will bring a lot of damage to ohm . And don't forget , at the moment we own our liquidity and earn fees, cex will take their cut in volume , probably less fees for Protocol , although we could possibly make up with arbs.

            No I believe a CEX listing is inevitable in the long run, but not now tbh. If enabled margins / futures trading would hurt the performance of OHM. without custodial bonding / staking enabled first, I don't see how a CEX listing would help.

            OHM works deeply with on-chain mechanics, i'm not sure the advertisement would prove useful. our "power user" or large investors won't be cex retail, after all.

            crypto_psych

            crypto_psych I second that. Olympus DAO has been running robustly since it is only available on sushiswap, so the treasury has greater control over the pools and they are able to deliver consistently high APY’s. CEX listing has too many unknown variables and the market correlation will get higher.

            The increase in traffic would be welcome but we would prefer the right kind of traffic in the growth stages.

                Don_G_Lover The primary goal of Olympus is to expand as a stable reserve asset throughout a larger Defi ecosystem. Any CEX listing will reduce Ohm exclusively to any other tradable asset within that platform. It would strip Ohm of the various use cases we as a community desire (3,3 staking, Ohm as collateral to access stablecoins, controlling majority of our own liquidity sources, partnering with other protocols to use our treasury services). Whatever positives a CEX listing would provide could not outweigh the negatives to our protocol. It simply works against Olympus’s goals of increasing protocol controlled value.

                  Simple - CEX listing decreases protocol revenue earned from trading fees. It’s simply too early for us.

                  While we should see the appeal of OHM to CEX's as a compliment, I fear this could light a fire on the whole experiment.

                  Your typical CEX user would likely not even read about the Olympus game theory nevermind take time to understand it and practice it (3, 3).

                  We're already getting 15,000% APY right now - let's not get greedy looking to price spike on a CEX.

                  My gut says we need Ohmies who understand the mission, and then after we become a stable asset we can bring in the more ordinary users.

                  My vote will be no, but, the fact that this is even coming up is a testament to the community.

                  (3, 3)

                  Don_G_Lover

                  Don_G_Lover CEX can bring extreme volatility and dilute the community. Ohmies are smashing it right now and there’s an old saying don’t fix something that isn’t broken. Overall I think it would be bad for the longevity of the coin, too early? Down the line maybe.

                      The protocol owning most of its liquidity is super valuable. Having the Ohm just sit in a CEX doing nothing is useless for us. I like this conversation but feels premature rn.

                      Another point to be made is that apart of the premium the Ohm token commands is due to the constraints on circulating supply as the majority is staked. Zeus has mentioned before that this is a key element in Ohm’s value proposition-that 3,3 generates artificial scarcity that feeds into a market premium. A CEX listing would grant larger access to active daily trading of the token which may disrupt this value proposition.

                      Way to soon, too many good things going now to chance it on such a play.