Here are then some more personal comments on how I feel about these options and what makes me want to choose one before the others.
I am now personally more encline to choose option 2. What lead me to support an Angle Gold stablecoin is that it’s an easy thing to launch, that can be positive marketing wise and that won’t take much time.
Immutability is attractive, but I am now doubtful of launching something without giving us the means from scratch to make it work.
The narrative of decentralized stablecoin is powerful, but I don’t believe people would use a decentralized stablecoin just because it’s fully decentralized (look at RAI low usage), you need incentives for people to use it. I believe that with a Curve pool on which the protocol can bootstrap agGOLD liquidity (through a direct deposit module), we have an obvious value proposal for people to switch for PAXG to agGOLD (to circumvent the fee on transfer) which comes with more friction for the decentralized stablecoin.
Another point is that with the immutable setup proposed, I’d still be possible to add new collateral assets and hence do in some way direct deposit modules (even though it’ll be harder), so rather than making it complex in this setting, let’s just keep the same setup as agEUR.
Like any experiment, I genuinely hope that an Angle Gold stablecoin would work.
Initial time investment is the same for both designs. So in the end, it’s a matter of probabilities for me: is there a higher chance of winning (at a same investment level) with the same flexibility as agEUR or with immutable contracts? I think that it’s more probable with same flexibility as agEUR, and if it does, we’ll have the means to do more things which are value additive with a flexible model.
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)
I believe that digital gold is one of the types of digital assets with which we can make a huge leap in the cryptocurrency industry! I also propose to consider the digitalization of other assets, such as silver and oil! So that not only shares are traded, but also tokens!
Thanks for good idea about cryptogold!
A stablecoin that is pegged to gold provides a number of advantages over other forms of digital currency.
Low Volatility: Stablecoins that are pegged to gold are much less volatile than other digital currencies, such as Bitcoin and Ethereum. This makes them attractive for investors who are looking for a way to store their money without having to worry about sudden price swings.
Security: Gold-backed stablecoins provide users with the security of gold, which is widely viewed as a safe haven asset. This means that users can be sure that their funds will remain secure even in times of economic uncertainty or market volatility.
Tangible Asset: Gold-backed stablecoins also provide users with the benefit of having access to a tangible asset. This means that users can convert their digital currency into an actual physical asset, such as gold bars or coins, if they so choose.
Easier International Payments: Gold-backed stablecoins also make it easier for users to make international payments since they do not have to worry about exchange rate fluctuations or other financial issues associated with traditional forms of payment processing.
Overall, gold-backed stablecoins offer users a number of advantages over other forms of digital currency and can be an attractive option for those looking for a secure and reliable way to store their money or make payments across borders.
So, I support the idea of stable gold, I thought about it for a long time and wondered why no one did this. You so great.