anonohmous

  • Oct 4, 2022
  • Joined Jun 30, 2021
  • biscuit well biscuit … with the vesting V2 (4,4) bonds.. assuming you're 3,3 and have the time / means to sell and snipe bonds.. you'd want to bond everytime the margin is > than the friction to sell and rebond right?

    This to me finally delivers on a pseudo locked stake type mechanism for those longterm 3,3 ers giving them a straightforward enough means to gain share.. and compete with bondors as they exist today.. and cuts the sell pressure out of the equation while doing it

    I'd see myself cutting my bag up into 3 sets of rolling 90 day expiring bonds… or eventually to a vault partner to manage such a strategy

    • Note: This post refers to a white paper that provides additional details about the strategy outlined below. (View the white paper as a PDF, View the white paper in Markdown.)

      Over the last 10 months, Olympus has been optimized for hyper-growth. Bootstrapping efforts have been successful, leading to a Treasury valued at nearly $550 million and a 100,000+ Ohmie strong community across 5 chains. As we mature, mechanisms and structures that were previously unavailable to us (as a function of low capitalization or low participation, for example) become viable, and may be preferable.

      In light of this, I propose a next step in the evolution of Olympus toward its vision of providing the digital world with its own currency:

      Internal Bonds

      The suggestion is that Olympus position itself toward a bond-emphasized model of token emissions and distribution: dubbed here as “Internal Bonds.” These Internal Bonds would be similar to the current "external" bonds. However, instead of providing a token such as DAI or ETH, bonders provide OHM.

      For each 1 OHM provided, the depositor is given a note granting their claim to X OHM at Y date. Bonds set to expire at the same time would be tokenized as composable ERC20s. For example, a set of bonds that expire on September 15, 2022, or December 15 2022. At expiration, bond holders would be able to claim XX OHM.
      These liquid markets would allow us to minimize and regulate bond yields (as they now trade in a two-way market), and maximize protocol benefit of token emissions.

      Bond Vaults, Trading and Lending

      To help facilitate the buying of OHM bonds, we would strongly encourage third party development of bond vaults. These vault applications would allow users to engage in automated bond strategies. We expect vaults to compete on strategies that will optimize yield for depositors. They may also serve as social groups akin to houses or clubs, creating new sub-communities within the larger Olympus community.

      Those directly interacting with bonds would still expect to find liquidity because:

      • Bonds may be traded: As standard ERC20 tokens, we can expect markets to emerge where participants can trade their bonds on DEXs for OHM before expiration at their fair value, as determined by the market.

      • Bonds may be used as collateral: We can also anticipate that bond lending markets would emerge where individuals will be able to borrow other assets against their bonds, increasing capital efficiency while segmenting risk to the broader Olympus economy.

      Implementation Overview

      The intent is not to introduce this in the near term. If signaled to be pursued, we would aim to implement this in the coming twelve to eighteen months. Action items during that period include, but are not limited to:

      • Research and development, especially with regard to automation and PID control.

      • Extensive modeling around the proposed implementation to properly understand potential outcomes and our means to manifest intended behavior.

      • Contract audits to ensure protocol safety.

      • Encouragement, and possibly incubation, of vault protocols and other relevant supporting entities.

      • Market maturity, to ensure participation and competition within the bond marketplace.

      • Education and communication to thoroughly inform and prepare the Olympus community and all relevant partners and participants.

      Signaling

      This post seeks to determine whether the overall structure and design is worth pursuing in the eyes of the community. I believe it would strongly enhance our prospects of long term success following thorough preparation. There is a lot more in there than what is listed in this post, and I hope I can count on your help in dissecting, discussing, and communicating the ideas presented. This is the first of several papers I and others hope to publish in the coming weeks focused on determining and quantifying our long-term goals, designs and milestones in the development of this network. I am excited to dig in.

      Please comment below whether you:

      • Support the ideas presented

      • Do not support the ideas presented

      Link to the PDF or Markdown if you did not see it above.

      • @shadow This is an important OIP, so to be fair to gOHM holders please allow gOHM voters to vote on snapshot for it. Or at the very least allow voting with the new sOHM version so holders can swap to it temporarily.

        Otherwise, gOHM holders may be forced to buy back the old sOHM version to vote. Thank you—just want to make sure the voting process is as fair and easy as possible especially to those who have migrated to gOHM as suggested.

      • I guess I don't understand why Olympus needs to pay (either through options or interest free loans) market maker(s). As stated by Zeus, "listing is in my opinion is inevitable whether we like it or not."

        Market makers can make money off of ohm tokens, regardless of whether the community "hires" one (as seen in the inevitability of listing). It would be unwise to just accept the first two proposals put in front of the community. Maybe we do want to incentivize market making faster than would happen naturally, but shouldn't we be conducting a formal bidding process? Is a zero percent interest loan the best we can get, or will market makers, knowing they will be making money of spreads, be willing to pay interest rather than (in the case of GSR) getting a >1 million USD loan for free?

        Remember you aren't voting on whether or not to hire a market maker, you are voting on whether or not to accept the proposals from literally the first two market maker offers. Wartull's comment on the GSR proposal says they have been in talks with many market makers. I'd like to know if there was there a lot of negotiation done to get to GSR's proposal and what other market makers were saying in these talks, at least for some context if we are flat out refusing to have more formal bidding.

        Where is the time sensitivity that is forcing one's hand? I get (especially in Wintermute's proposal) that the amount being loaned isn't a huge fraction of the treasury, but this should be done right.

        • crud

          Fair arguments ser about timing and stage of the Tokemak product.

          However the APR comparison is not, since DAO owned Ohm is not staked. We're holding a growing stack of almost 1mil OHM that needs to be put into good use slowly overtime. DAO swaps are the lowest hanging fruit to get started.

          • First time seeing a budget for paying out contributors.

            Honestly shocked by how smol it is.

            (https://imgflip.com/i/5unmw7)

            I share similar concerns to cryptok1ng, but my thought process goes the other way—it makes sense to start contemplating newexpansif budgets at different stages of growth. Though I recognize the difficulty inherent in predicting the future.

            I would also echo Antonio's (from dYdX—see thread here https://twitter.com/AntonioMJuliano/status/1458844848560087070) comments about DAOs in the space being guilty of criminally underusing their treasuries. The top DAOs spend 1% of their treasuries annually—why??
            Phase 1 is all about growth, and network effects are crucial to establish early (especially since Olympus is getting forked like Thanksgiving Dinner at Jon Goodman's house).
            I think the core team+contributors should be granted substantially (10x) more leeway in expanding the budget.
            Will this tank price? Ya, probably. But people who get the protocol will understand short term pain for long term gain.

            But wot do I know, am an doge.

            Much appreciate 4 all the hard work OHMies.

            ~bork