Liquidity Housekeeping

There are a plethora of things we need to take care of that I have been putting off for the mere purposes of organizing it. However, I’ll try to keep it short and simple for everyone.

Arbitrum Liquidity: Since we have liquidity locked on Mainnet with OHM/BOND on Balancer I think the doubled liquidity of BOND/USDC in the UNIV2 pool is less useful. It may still be deferring to that pool but it’s simply because of the USDC pairing.

We had a long call with the Sushi team and if we set up liquidity for BOND/ETH (my preference is BOND/ETH at this point because of where we are in the market) we should be able to port this to their cross chain swap platform as it’s rolled out. This means we will have liquidity for BOND on multiple L1s, L2s, and main net.

While this may be the long term play here I think we play it by ear and see how it all rolls out but it’s a great starting point.

Optimism Liquidity/Velodrome: We’ve been bribing this pool for a while now but since our DAO will be launching on Arbitrum (potentially by the end of this week) I believe these bribes (I believe it’s around $12k/month would be more useful simply “bribing” the SYV2 pools. For that reason, I think after this week, we can stop with the bribes but can keep our liquidity there.

AURA Bribes: Does the community find it useful to provide Aura bribes on mainnet for BOND/OHM? Would they feel different if OHM was to match them?

Market Making: Once we get the DAO on Arbitrum, we should have 2 quotes for market making. I’ll post these over the next week or two.

2 Likes

Cross chain swaps would be nice. Are you comfortable with us deploying on it right now? I don’t know much about it. How would we deploy capital for it to be effective?

Stop the capital outflows that are nonessential or have become a limited contributor to the current cause. Smart Alpha should be included on the chopping block with OP/Velo bribes. SYv1 too if it has any recurring expenses.

I’d prefer no bribes on any pairing atm.

Tend to agree with Mike here, but do want to make sure we have an Arbitrum liquidity solution off the bat to support rollout of the DAO. I don’t have strong feelings about how that liquidity is provided, other than to put my vote in for being extremely conservative (careful) about how we do so, on something that has as low likelihood of being attacked as possible.

Definitely agree with focus on capital outflows to follow the DAO rollout, shutting down SA until it can be rebuilt high on that list, but want to make sure we do it thoughtfully with plenty of open communication to users and social media so that when people come and complain (which will happen regardless of how it is handled), we can show a thought out plan and multiple communication attempts.

To me, bribes should be minimized for the time being, unless we are finding we don’t have enough users to fully exercise everything that is being rolled out. Once confidence is there for larger marketing push (DAO rollout completed/burned in, SY beta testing cleaned up), money for bribes seems best aligned with this kind of timeframe IMO.

2 Likes

Generally agree with everything said so far. Here are my thoughts:

Arbitrum Liquidity - I’m not super familiar with Sushi’s cross chain swap platform, but my (uneducated) first response is that a cross chain swap platform sounds risky. I’d almost rather take some of the USDC from our current BOND/USDC pool and buy ETH to pair with BOND and keep that on Arbitrum.

Optimism Liquidity - I think it’s fine to leave our POL over there, but the bribes need to end. The whole purpose of having liquidity on Optimism was to encourage users to bridge over in advance of the DAO being established over there. Additionally it didn’t look like it was going to be as significant of an outlay of BOND when the prices were higher and we were expecting to be able to match that with OP tokens (RIP). At some point we should probably bring our Optimism POL to mainnet or Abritrum because it’s not really enough to be meaningful on it’s own.

AURA Bribes - I’d feel a little different if OHM was to match bribes, but just don’t see enough of a benefit that we would gain from increasing our mainnet liquidity right now. I’d consider this in the future if we feel that we need more liquidity on mainnet for some reason.

Market Making - Competitive bid for marketing making LFG

2 Likes

Mainnet
We have liquidity on Ethereum Mainnet due to OHM/BOND pair. It represents about $1M TVL, which seems sufficient enough.
Additionally we still own 52% of USDC/BOND pool → about $1.8M TVL. So there is about $4.5M TVL in liquidity on mainnet for $BOND. (BarnBridge Mainnet Liquidity)
This is unnecessarily too much and we should use that capital in more efficient way!

Optimism
I would not consider any bribes or any action/strategy on Optimism. There is no benefit for BB DAO to do so.

Arbitrum
Since DAO will launch on Arbitrum, that should be our priority for liquidity strategy from now on. I would be happy to move over POL from Mainnet to Arbitrum and deploy part of POL over there. I agree that ETH is more reasonable for pairing. Because USDC/ETH has very deep liquidity I would be ok with making a simple swap on Cowswap and bridge acquired ETH to Arbitrum thereafter and pair with $BOND.

I don’t think we need any incentives at all! Not even for the product itself! Since we already provide incentives in form of injected yield for Aave pool to demonstrate the mechanism is robust and solid! But those lending rates are not sustainable. When we launch Velodrome and Curve we should reconsider our participation on all originators and focus on those that make sense the most!

1 Like

Well wait - to start the plan would be to just straight up launch to Arbitrum to start while we see how the cross chain stuff works over a period of time. Just wanted to clarify.

I agree on this as well but will chat with you guys on the call for the community group.

Actually in terms of the OHM stuff I think we don’t really need to match it due to the depth in liquidity on main net.

In terms of bribes I think I’ve come up with a more capital efficient way to grow our balance sheet that would be equivalent to most bribes.

I actually agree with this due to depth in liquidity.