Thanks for the question! Yes you’re right that we could have added this data.
First point is that costs are the deployment costs (estimated around $1k) and the development time (which putting it all together should be around 2 weeks).
Maintenance cost should be null as well (assuming no oracle cost), as the borrowing module can turn with no external intervention. The only added cost from oracles would be that we’ll potentially have to pay for the XAU/USD oracle from Chainlink, but this is the same when adding any new collateral asset for the Borrowing module.
Main costs will be that of the incentives for the gauges we make: agEUR-agGOLD, this is something which should be voted by veANGLE holders, so hard to predict, and won’t result in extra incentives, so just an opportunity cost. No budget planned for Curve incentives, we could specify in a future proposal using a portion of the Curve bribe budget to bribe agGOLD-PAXG (diverted from agEUR-EUROC).
There will be a seeding cost that I wanted to address in a subsequent proposal once it’s clearer what the perspectives with agGOLD are, my idea if hypothesis 2 was to take USDC from the surplus to buy PAXG and seed the PAXG-agGOLD pool with minted agGOLD.
TAM of providing transferable gold derivatives is that of PAXG I guess (so approx $500m). Accrued fees are also hard to estimate: on Curve, it’s possible that liquidity grows quite a lot and the protocol makes 0.02% on each PAXG<->agGOLD swap + accumulates CRV and CVX incentives on top (would depend on CRV votes though)