• General

  • Abachi + Olympus DAO - Intro & req. for comments

Apologies for any formatting issues.

Fully support this. Abachi is what I've waited for and it will emphasize and make more active the role of $OHM as a DeFi reserve currency and OlympusDAO as a decentralized central bank.

Thanks for the well written proposal

Abachi aiming to get more buyers into ohm (not just the crypto market) should help us spread our influence across more markets and bring back more value to ohm and the ohmies. You cannot have a reserve currency without having more people join us in adopting it

The way i see abachi is that it could be a source of continual buy pressure for ohm, providing ohm keeps on growing (which im sure we all think we will) then abachi will keep on accumulating ohm

It looks like there is a downside to this if ohm was to decline as abachi would as a last resort need to sell some ohm? please correct me if im wrong abachi

In which case this isnt very different then the 9,9 strategy we ohmies use and i hope/have confidence in the team to manage risk and avoid liquidating any ohm as a last resort.

Luca plus looks like a strong and legit run business, perhaps an AMA could be arrange to ease and highlight the strength of your company to ohmies

Lastly on the buying of abachi for the ohm dao treasury i think its a small amount and its worth the R:R for ohmies

could you also please expand on Provide gOHM-ABI liquidity on Polygon with the 17500 tokens offered to Olympus DAO as a loan until there is enough liquidity. OlympusDAO & Abachi to split LP fees 50%. How long do you think this will be?

Hopefully other ohmies can see the value add in this team and project <3

    Coud

    If OHM falls massively, two things should happen.

    1. Stables go into a large discount

    2. Stables buy OHM

    Our floor is guaranteed by OHM so it makes sense to front-run the ohm floor. So e.g. it would be in abachis interest to buy everything right above $1 (assuming floor). At that point all stables are buying OHM and ABI is at a deep discount against stables to buy those.

    The only black swan risk is if OHM goes to 0.

      Will KYC be required to invest into Abachi?

      First and foremost: very exciting to see people have the guts to enter this space. Kudos to you.

      Whenever I look at a project I try to look at what macro vision is and how that correlates to the team behind it. In my humble opinion, the goals of Abachi are extremely diverse and ambitious in a space that is becoming ever more crowded. I have to wonder how realistic some of these goals are. Bridging crypto and the non-crypto world has been tried many times before with lots of failures and successes in between. I fear the goals stated are far too ambitious to be achievable in a 3-5 year time-frame. This makes me doubt whether the team has enough background to lead this kind of large operation.

      1. A multi-chain wallet is a business on its own. And I think that ultimately most large TradFi companies will employ custom solutions. Centralised echanges like Coinbase and Gemini will offer custodial services and act as the clearance houses between these worlds. How does Abachi aim to compete with these giants?
      2. If Abachi will launch stable pools that are ABI incentived, won't these rapidly dilute Olympus' ABI tokens? How does Abachi aim to compete with Curve?
      3. KYC/AML services are without a doubt hot right now. I feel Abachi can be well suited to explore this space given your background. How do you feel you can overcome competition in this sector?
      4. I feel this is a completely different project than all the others. Given how complex yield futures, option vaults and others have been to develop, what makes Abachi suites to tap into this market?
      5. I think this ties into the competition with CEX entities. If Abachi can carve out a chunk of KYC/AML services then perhaps it will have some of the infrastructure and trust built to also look into this space next.
      6. Bridging physical assets into crypto is very hard. I'm brought back to thinking of projects like Digix and how they failed to make this work in a timely matter. I'm very curious towards how Abachi looks at this space and how it sees itself best suited to tackle these challenges.
      7. How will Abachi compete with larger CEX players like Coinbase, Binance, Gemini and FTX?

      At this moment in time I feel this project may be a bit too ambitious. There's so much competition in these spaces and the talent required takes considerable capital. I think for some projects a DAO is the best way forward. But I feel some of the goals in this projects would work better from the point of view of a centralized entity. I have doubt that a DAO can compete in some spaces with large centralized companies that can keep raising money to throw at issues.

      Finally, as many people here will have noticed. There seems to have been a rising tendency to bribe Ohm holders to vote for their proposal. Like Lobis, some other forks are now trying to do the same. Abachi has also decided to take this route.

      We as Ohm holders have to question whether we really want to encourage this behavior. I think Olympus should try to encourage innovation but we have to be wary of who we invite into the Eco-system. We might invite another wolf named Danny otherwise. If we spread our Olympus troops too far and wide, we run the risk of fracturing into multiple Greek states if you will. It will hurt the brand and trust into the project long term. My biggest bag is Ohm, my incentives are aligned with its long term success. But the bribes may not always bring us closer to our long term goals.

      Thanks for the reply MrMochi. I appreciate the kind words, it did take a lot to enter this space and write up this proposal.

      There were a few concerns, I'll try to address best I can. I feel like you are assuming Abachi is building all this tech in-house. This is not the case. Abachi is funding grants and projects for tech that is already built to bring it into a core coherent, single offering that abstracts all these complexities away.

      A developer will have access to libraries that they can include in their project. Call a function to spin up a new wallet which may be powered by composable finance or Gnosis on the back end. Call a function to spin up an ondemand liquidity pool powered by Aave, Composable etc.

      The work is going into creating a core stack of tech that is end user and enterprise friendly which developers can readily use. Today e.g. if they want to achieve a seamless experience, they need to undertake each of those integrations seperately. e.g. Gnosis. the only projects building on it are dapps. When its actually quite possible to integrate the wallet completely client-side into a web front-end.

      1. Multi-chain wallet is absolutely a business on its own. We did try to show that in the user flow. Abachi is not building its own wallet, its offering an SDK that has those capabilities built into it all abstracted and consumable into a core licensable offering. Due to the modules included (composable, gnosis, openbanking etc.) the development for end-user apps is rapidly accelerated.

      2. Yes they will dilute, this is mentioned as a risk and will be up to the DAO to vote on, both emissions and incentives. The emissions do not need to be that high to get a higher yield, there is a link in there to try and use rebase rewards to do this. There are two distinct projects that I know of that are tackling this space. Abachi would fund them to try and make this a reality.

      3. Abachi is not trying to overcome or get into the KYC space. It will work with existing tech to offer these as modular pieces inside a core offering. KYC can be tokenized and shared. e.g. If you KYC with BlockPass you do not need to do it again. This can be extended further so that as you go from Partner A to Partner B - the tokenized credentialing do not need to be done again. The tokens themselves can inherit a lot of properties e.g. expiration, jurisdiction, issuing authority etc.

      4. A debt obligation, a credit pool and asset backed loans etc. are indeed a complex area. In the proposal Abachi funds the research and development into these bonds. V2 Olympus builds on this idea with fungible and non fungible bonds, which very closely resemble real world bonds. There are two things to tackle here. A credit pool and Individual bonds. A credit pool is a pool of obligations where the yield is calculated based on the default rates and risk offset with maturities of those obligations. We have a central banker on board who does this for a living, and we aim to fund more research into this. The second part is an individual bond e.g. a $ dollar bond issued by a sovereign nation. These are easier as the bond at issue as the maturity defined, terms defined. The work that needs to be done is to provide the end users a front-end to be able to issue these with the terms they need. Those once tokenized are no different to a real-world bond. We plan to bring more inhouse expertise for this, but we have 2 people right now who work in this space for a major central bank.

      5. Some information on this replied above. in #3.

      6. This is already being done quite successfully without using the blockchain. www.brickx.com is an example that comes to mind. If you just tokenize those and bring them on-chain, those bricks they sell are essentially tokens, each with a value. The issue to tackle here would be how do you lend against it or use it as collateral (which is an interesting problem to solve because it then goes into securitizing not just the complete asset, but pieces of the asset). Abachi will fund such research work and give out grants for MVPs and teams to provide proof of concepts.

      7. FTX, Coinbase, Binance, Gemini are just another module in the core Abachi Stack that developers can chose to use. I expect them to help us build these "modules" or "plugins". I included a section on partner onboarding on how I envision it works.

      I hope these answer some of your concerns, and I welcome the feedback. Absolutely this is an ambitious project but I do want to mention. Using OHM as a backing treasury is not a bribe. I'll give an example.

      While I was not born there, my parents are from Pakistan. Every few years, when the entire country is on the brink of collapse, it issues dollar bonds (amongst other bonds). These are issued because the biggest politicial and economical threat to Pakistan is the devaluation of its currency when its dollar reserve goes down.

      If you are basing your currency on another currency, its not a bribe, but a necessity to acquire as much of it as you can to increase the value of your own. This increases the value of your own currency. e.g. It is not important for Abachi to save the price of ABI. It is however imperative that it save OHM. We use OHM as a treasury asset because we believe it is a currency and should be used as such. All other currencies should do essentially the same as we are proposing. OHM as a bank guarantees us the minimum floor.

      e.g. if currencies were based on gold, the highest value would be to the one with the largest amount of gold. Had Abachi been backed by Gold, it would be in its interest to acquire gold instead of trying to buy back ABI in the market. The gold reserves would lend that backing.

      Interesting, but flawed plan.

      Hey ser - I am sure there are good answers but I have a cpl of questions concerning the tokenomics:

      1. Olympus DAO acquires a stake in Abachi by buying out 25,000 tokens at $15 for a total of $375,000 paid to Abachi 100% in OHM.

        1. Abachi will not be selling this, but keep it for the treasury backing.
        2. Olympus DAO can decide if this should be in the main treasury or ohm treasury.
        3. Our lowest conservative estimate is that we will be buying 1.5m of OHM before launch.

      2. Provide gOHM-ABI liquidity on Polygon with the 17500 tokens offered to Olympus DAO as a loan until there is enough liquidity. OlympusDAO & Abachi to split LP fees 50%.

      If Olympus is only receiving 10% of pABI where is the rest going? What are the other allocations of pABI and aABI?

      What seed fundraising is occurring, who are the people who have committed to the raises and at what rates funded at?

      Why does Abachi require Olympus to provide $375,00 OHM for an allocation if it is already committing its name, reputation and DAO talent?

      At what price will the 17500 tokens offered to Olympus DAO, be paired at for the liquidity Abachi is seeking Olympus to provide? Won't this put more of our treasury OHM at risk if the price decreases?

      Why does it need this liquidity to be provided by Olympus if it is already doing a public fundraising?

        The concept and plan are intriguing and should be considered and studied by the Olympus DAO and Ohmies in-depth. The onboarding of TradFi and using Ohm as the basis is something we should work on as a priority in my opinion. First mover advantage is always important and the health of the Protocol requires demand that is not fickle and runs after the first sign of "higher APY". Stable Ohm holders will guarantee growth.

        I understand more details need to be worked out and discussed especially the priorities of the execution considering the ambitious and varying scope mentioned.

        One question to the Abachi team regarding Luca Plus as they were mentioned a few times as a main source of onboarding Businesses, can you clarify more the process for Luca and the types of businesses they onboard.

          Mark11

          Hello ser

          1. pABI allocations below (also in the deck)
          - 50% to early investors for a total raise of $962,500.
          - 30% to the team.
          - 10% to Olympus DAO
          - 10% to contributors & advisors.

          2. Rounds for aABI:
          - SEED Raise @ 15 per token for 25,000 tokens. Total raised = 375,000
          - Olympus DAO @15 per token for 25,000 tokens = 375,000 (proposed)
          - Whitelist @ 20 per token for 50,000 tokens = 1m
          - Auction @ 20 per token for 75,000 tokens =~ 1.5m
          - 17500 tokens are not sold and will be returned back to the DAO, the intend is to bootstrap liquidity for aABI markets against gOHM after the auction concludes.

          Seed (375,000) was funded by early investors, advisors and the team.

          3. I shall remove the provision for the liquidity loan if this is a concern. The idea was that the DAO would be paid back in LP fees as part of compensation. These would have been lent at the selling price of $20 with a guarantee from Abachi to compensate OlympusDAO

          The request for 375,000 comes to acquire a stake in Abachi and help bootstrap the project treasury. If contentious this can be removed.

          The entire raise (less 375,000) from aABI goes back into the main treasury as a backing price and will be used to buy 50% gOHM. You are correct that OlympusDao is lending its name and reputation, but both incubation and grants program aim to do the same to further the OlympusDAO ecosystem, and Abachi is deeply vested in this.

          When the project was initially proposed, we had only 375,000 raised internally to bootstrap it and were looking for OlympusDAO to help raise.

            Promising project

            Write a Reply...