Olympus Pro Bonds Final Push

The previous proposal can be found here: Snapshot and with it, variant 4 won, with the following settings

[500k USF for usage within 1 month
Disable LP rewards (as an incentive to use Bonds)]

Now that the trial has ended in a success with 100% of the bonds being sold out its time to extend this program for a longer period of time since USF now owns ~15% of the ETH/USF pool on Uniswap. Since the original bond program was 500k USF for 1 month which resulted in getting ~15% of the uniswap LP’s, I am proposing we sprint towards our original goal of getting greater than 50% of the LP pool into the hands of the Unslashed DAO before we permanently turn off LP emissions. To accomplish this, I am suggesting the following.

1.5m USF available for bonding, which if we sell out again, will put ~45% of the LP pool into the hands of the Unslashed DAO, combined with the 15% we already own puts us at 60% in total.

With the above said, we can also discuss vesting. Pros and Cons discussed here: Discord

All choices below automatically include 1.5m USF total for usage within the 2 month period and the continued disabling of LP rewards while Olympus Pro bonds are active.

Choice 1) Remain with 7 day vesting

Choice 2) Change to 10 day vesting

Choice 3) Change to 12 day vesting

Choice 4) Do not extend Olympus Pro

2 Likes

hey, thanks for pressing on, voting for choice 1

Good proposal! Option 1 given what I’ve seen work well with other protocols

I dont know if we will actually hit 60%, but I thought it was better to overshoot and have too much of the LP than to undershoot and have too little.

Regarding the different options, it is worth it to note that we noticed that a couple wallets were trying to game the bonding by using the discount that is offered, a longer vesting would allow to have bonds that are less likely to be gamed and more likely to be adopted in a more positive fashion; offer a discount in exchange for LP tokens and not offer an arbitrage opportunity that comes with a cost that is dumping the received USF in the market in order to repeat the arbitrage again.

Going for even longer vestings (up to 20 days for example) might allow to make the arbitrage more risky for these wallets and therefore eventually loss-making in case they give it a try again

also the arbitrage itself harms the more genuine potential bonders who end up having to compete with arbitrageurs

also the arbitrage itself harms the more genuine potential bonders who end up having to compete with arbitrageurs

True. However, the bots activate once the discount gets to some point above 13%. if we humans are aware of this, we could get in at the 12.5% range for example and beat them everytime. I dont see the difference of a bot doing it vs. a human doing the same manually. I think the bots are a necessary evil to accomplish our goal.

Going for even longer vestings (up to 20 days for example) might allow to make the arbitrage more risky for these wallets and therefore eventually loss-making in case they give it a try again

The longest vesting I found was 10 days on Olympus with the overwhelming majority set to 7 days, including Alchemix, Shapeshift and Rune.

If they dump, it just gives USF holders the opportunity to buy cheap. Maybe that should be the play here. If someone were to monitor when they dump and put an alert out in the speculation channel so those who want to buy cheap, can.

Whether it’s a bot or a human, the behaviour itself is what we would like to “fight against”, the discount can be taken by different types of users who would be interested in participating in the OP program and not just trying to game it. I don’t think this type of behaviour is a necessary evil and it’s better to leave the possibility open to genuine actors than ask them to compete with ones who mainly try to game the system :slight_smile:

7 days is more like the standard number that OP proposes, I think each case is different and we need to adapt fast as it also depends on the size of the community and how willing it is to keep an eye on the OP discount and compete - in our case the wallets trying to game the system are more active so we need to figure out a solution for that.

Regarding the dump, it’s actually counterproductive to let it happen and allows value to be extracted from a mechanic that has a different purpose. Giving a discount in USF is different from having ETH taken from the pool because there is a time arbitrage (that’s the issue pooltogether seems to have had as well)

the discount can be taken by different types of users who would be interested in participating in the OP program and not just trying to game it.

My fear is that we don’t have enough in this community to accomplish that and thus, we are forced to rely on these bad actors.

7 days is more like the standard number that OP proposes

It is the standard as you say, I was just using them as reference for not changing the vesting. With the smaller protocols like USF, they too were using 7 day but not well known either. So i’ll just say, im 100% in favor of longer vesting, if we believe we will still get the LP shares we desire. Otherwise, im in favor of the continued 7 day vesting.

One last thing. Since I am hoping this is to be the final push for USF to grab that liquidity, in the worst case scenario, we have these bad actors arbitraging the difference between today and the end of the Olympus Pro program. But then after that, its over with. No more arbitragers. No more sell pressure. CRV like staking goes into effect. They would be the ones really hurting themselves by dumping exclusively for the arbitrage opportunity.

The arbitrageurs don’t care about staking, if they are offered the opportunity to extract value with low risk, they will just do it. This is not only about the dump, this is more about the extracted value; each arbitrage is 10-15% in ETH that is moving from the Uni LPs to the arbitrageurs pockets, on 1.5m USF it’s 150k USF or about 25 ETH.
We don’t actually need them, anyone interested in buying USF could go through the Uni LP and use it to get a discount, having the arbitrageurs’ activity basically closes the door to more regular users who end up having to compete with them.

It’s better to have it done in the original spirit and see over one month whether we are hitting our numbers or not, then try to understand what is blocking and act/extend accordingly. The 7 days were made to avoid arbitrage and they don’t seem to be enough in our case, maybe it’s enough for other projects but it’s not the case for us.