We have been talking quite recently to Olympus Pro in order to sell a fraction of the LP tokens of the Sushi pool ANGLE/agEUR. This would be a way for the protocol to accumulate some surplus and start owning some of its agEUR. Owning agEUR liquidity could be a way for the protocol to create liquidity on L2s and side chains to bootstrap some liquidity pools. In the wake of DeFi 2.0, I personally feel that it’s important for protocols to control their liquidity and own their collateral.
The risk of doing so is to have a sell pressure on the ANGLE token: tokens sold via Olympus Pro are tokens that are going to be given on top of the liquidity mining program.
The idea is really to start by putting a really low amount of tokens each week (200k ANGLE tokens) and to increase this amount of token or to decrease it if the sell pressure becomes too important.
I am going to create a Snapshot vote to evaluate community approval on this.
Happy to hear your thoughts
I think the selling pressure at the moment is mainly from miners who don’t trust the protocol, or are desperate for short-term gains.
The sale by protocol itself should not have much impact, and the benefits are clear.
I agree with Evans. Most of the selling pressure is reflected on Gate.io and SushiSwap. They are all the miners. In a long term, the price at this stage is good for holders and the early community to build up the confidence.
In order to address a sell pressure on the ANGLE token have you considered trying to get a https://www.tokemak.xyz/ reactor for agEUR ?
We could try to bribe TOKE holders once and for good on https://votemak.com/ by incentivizing them with ANGLE tokens , get that reactor and be able to single side stake on their plateform and remunerate agEUR stakers in TOKE instead of ANGLE. The earned TOKE would then be used to chose where the agEUR liquidity should be directed.
If you want to follow this path we better act sooner than later as I can see CRV-like war taking on TOKE and the more we wait the more expensive it will become to bribe TOKE holders in my opinions.
Super interesting idea! Will definitely look into it!
Reopening this discussion as the 400k ANGLE tokens dedicated to Olympus Pro have all been sold.
The questions now are the following:
- should we send more ANGLE tokens to the program? Currently 400k ANGLE tokens have been sold through the program, and we could send additional tokens to reactivate it (like 200k ANGLE to start with and then filling up if demand continues)
- Or, should we stop it completely? There is nothing particular to do in this case.
- Another idea could be to continue the program but with a different manner by for instance getting agEUR (instead of Sushi LP tokens) through this program? This would maybe be more efficient. As a reminder, ANGLE tokens sold through Olympus Pro are vested for a period of two weeks!
For the record, Olympus Pro has allowed the protocol to make $170k of revenue, a portion of it has been used to bootstrap the Rari pool with agEUR. Some has also been lent to Wert which is the first on-ramp solution for agEUR. This has thus been pretty useful for the protocol which does not control any of its TVL.
As a reminder, ANGLE tokens sold through Olympus Pro are vested for a period of two weeks!
For those of you who want clarifications on the different voting options in the vote:
- Keep Selling ANGLE against Sushi LP ANGLE/agEUR
- Completely stop the program
- Sell ANGLE this time but against agEUR directly
Voting in favor of ANGLE agEUR-only bond program
Though I believe Olympus Pro to be a very useful tool for DAOs both to build reserves and to maintain their own liquidity, I think there were a few flaws in the current Angle’s bond program which made it not ideal for the protocol. This caused me to originally favor stopping the program, and here were my reasons:
1. Selling a token for which demand is not established enough yet.
2. Selling it against agEUR/ANGLE liquidity. I believe this to be detrimental for two reasons.
One, it’s building agEUR/ANGLE liquidity when there isn’t much ANGLE liquidity against USDC and ETH yet, nor agEUR/ETH. These should be prioritized. Second, selling against agEUR/ANGLE is not ideal either for users as it requires high gas costs."
However, I came up to realize that (1) is changing, and demand will hopefully materialize with the new tokenomics release in early January, and that selling ANGLE against agEUR could help the DAO build an agEUR reserve to help bootstrap pools liquidity and use cases in different networks.
For these reasons, I have changed my votes in favor of the ANGLE Olympus Bond program selling against agEUR. However, I consider that we should be careful not to increase the quantities of ANGLE sold through this program.