BrianPeace shadow
I misunderstood the ETH allocation point, reading the proposal as if ETH would be constantly rebalanced to 5% of RFV over a 45-60 rolling average holding period.
"Target 5% of Treasury risk free value (RFV) being ETH
Example: If Treasury RFV is 19 million, we would aim to accumulate $950,000 of ETH
Reach this target over a period of 45-60 days (bonds are not exact science, so we define a range)"
I am glad that at at this point we will not be actively trading or trying to dynamically re-balance Treasury assets through sales.
Regarding purchasing ETH as a means to 'achieve our vision'. This is could be said about any asset we add to the treasury. I think we should be more explicit. Why ETH? To be clear, I don't think its necessarily good or bad for the protocol to add ETH, I just want to understand why we're doing this. I care about the rationale because it speaks to the future.
There is nothing explicitly in the documentation about buying any particular asset class or token for the treasury, so the Olympus forum is the correct venue for these discussions. Treasury allocation decisions should be thoroughly presented and thoroughly tested/debated, keeping in mind that 'reserve currency' status is the project objective, not merely decentralised asset accumulation. I think the question we should always be able to answer is: how does this asset allocation get us closer to DeFi's 'reserve currency' status?
So, how does ETH (as a volatile 'ultra-hard-money' deflationary asset) get us closer to DeFi's 'reserve currency' status?