• Proposal

  • OIP-19: Approve DAO to pursue strategic swaps with holdings

Summary: The DAO currently holds over 200,000 OHM meant to be utilized to support and expand Olympus and its’ ecosystem. We believe an important way to do so is via strategic partnerships with crucial infrastructural protocols in the industry. We would like clarity on our ability to pursue swaps with aforementioned protocols, and strategic entities, as a way to bolster our utility as the reserve currency of the Decentralized Finance industry.

Abstract: We propose a clear mandate allowing the DAO to pursue strategic swaps. Swaps may occur at par, a discount, or a premium, depending on additional factors involved with each deal. Strategies may include commitments to bond the partners’ token, especially within OHM-X pools.

All decisions would be voted upon prior to finalization. Approval here allows DAO members to initiate conversations with other DAOs and entities and structure terms that should be agreeable both to the counterparty and the Olympus community. In other words, this provides permission to speak on behalf of the DAO during the legwork of these proposals.

Potential partners include (but are not limited to): Sushiswap, Maker, Aave, Frax, Rari, Tokemak, and Yearn.

Motivation: Increase OHMs use and utility as a liquid reserve asset, and bolster Olympus’s influence within the DeFi industry.

Concerns: DAO-owned OHM would be introduced into the market. However, it would remain in the possession of those who are highly likely to remain long-term aligned with us.

For: Approve DAO to pursue strategic swaps

Against: Do not approve DAO to pursue strategic swaps.

I am:

    For the proposal, I do think we should set a consensus in this proposal as well if we will let these DAO's stake their OHM that is swapped if there is no other agreement made. I would like to avoid this as it will dilute our ohmies rewards.

      This will be an interesting next step.. it looks like all of our proposed partners would be mostly incentivized to cooperate, but I'm worried of the counter party risk we'd incur. I suppose diversifying our supply between them all would be a good mitigation, but it would be nice if there were some conditionals outlined to assess the protocols to collaborate with.

      Jawesome

      i think they need to be able to stake it, otherwise it is immediately being devalued. But yes it should be clear that other protocols will more than likely want to stake the OHM they buy from us.

      all-in-all love the idea, very much for it.

        Zeus

        this is a great move! it's a must as long as we keep the main themed focus

        this is definitely the move!

          Jawesome

          Yeah I agree, what exactly would these DAOs do with their ohm? If they are aligned, but also stake massive amounts, us ohmies will have lesser rewards right? 🙁

            Yes, it should be a mutual "swap and stake" type of deal.

            Jawesome

            That would be something addressed in any proposal born from this one.

              even if it is inevitable to extend and branch out into the breasts of the DEFI, is there not a possibility that the vote of the ohmies will be diluted in favor of a more powerful protocol? especially if it is a question of OHM and not of sOHM or xOHM ...

              is it possible to have some details on this sentence? "it would remain in the possession of those who are highly likely to remain long-term aligned with us."

              • Zeus replied to this.

                Lovin' it. This is the play. Lets make waves.

                AlexKID33

                if we do the swap with a DAO, its likely that (or we can even ensure in the terms that) a governance vote has to take place prior to any change in exposure. This means that, like us, they are unlikely to offload their holdings and if they do there is significant heads up, discussion, and an opportunity for us to participate in discussion/vote.

                  Jawesome

                  if the deal is "you can only have purely dilutionary spot OHM," it is extremely unlikely that a deal ever takes place. Partners should be treated the same as ohmies.

                      Kronborg

                      Zeus

                      I see no overall problem with staking. However it should be regulated with predetermined levels for each DAO partner. The worst thing that would happen is you create a market maker that can influence OHM too much. Would like to see Ohmies remain as majority shareholders.

                          I think this is a great step in the right direction for the DAO and brings OHM closer to its stated goal of being the best reserve asset in DeFi

                          I’d like to see parameters around each agreement related to how swapped assets will be used (on both sides). For example Will a partner DAO be expected to hold a portion of the OHM - X liquidity or would their exposure be purely through OHMs share on said assets, either could be fine but some thought should be given to this.

                          Definitely in the right direction towards making OHM an attractive treasury reserve asset

                            Zeus

                            If we want to treat the partners as ohmies than there has to be some benefit to us as well so it's not one sided. Can we stake their token and is it a competitive apy/apr, what else can we do, etc.

                            • irc replied to this.

                                Sounds like this proposal does not lead to any open-ended commitments for Ohmies. It just allows us to begin conversations with other projects about potential partnerships that might be mutually beneficial. So any deal arising from those conversations would need to have their own separate OIPs to be approved. If this is the case, I think this is a good idea. If a partnership proposal arises that is not aligned with the best interests of the community, we can vote it down. But having the flexibility to at least begin those conversations seems reasonable. However, I'd also welcome a conversation on alternative ways to leverage these funds. Perhaps there are other creative uses for them that are being overlooked?