Bolstering the value of $BANK
Last edited by
Date
Last Edited Time
Feb 4, 2022
Goals
- discuss potential items to include in the snapshot proposal
- next steps and action items for moving the snapshot forward
Discussion
- legal ramifications
- utility tokens are fine and low regulatory risk
- we had a fair launch, there was no sale (no security)
- Yearn model - buyback component is considered ok, good model setting precedence
- proposal inclusions:
- support using a % of the DAO's non-BANK revenue to bolster the value of BANK
- start when we reach some (arbitrary) threshold in treasury assets (non-BANK)
- forum poll language was $250k in revenue (unspecified timeframe), might make sense to say $250k or more in treasury assets instead
- option to also include a revenue trigger in terms of annualized current revenue
- option to turn off if treasury assets fall below the threshold, AAJ: might make sense to have upper and lower bound parameters (on/off switches)
- actual mechanisms are not being determined in the snapshot, rather it proposes to set up a scope squad to research strategy (cross-guild collab), request an allocation of BANK for that research project to determine the tokenomics mechanisms, goal is to define the triggers and how reallocation decisions will be made
Additional topics discussed/brainstormed:
- initial funding can just be to define the mechanisms, additional funding could be requested for later maintenance and management if required, use the main source of DAO funding for scope squad - separate portion outside of guild funding
- 4 strategies have been discussed so far (there may be more options/combinations with the stake and subscribe model, if membership requirements transition that way) - which to prioritize? scope squad to research and submit recommendation
- rough timing expectation - maybe a month to get through snapshot and if successful set committee - another 4-6 weeks to get to a second snapshot vote intended to implement the chosen mechanism(s) - however, there is no required timeframe to complete, so the scope squad can take the time required to find the best solution
- scope squad formation - might be good to have a table that outlines which guilds are needed and # of participants in each
- dev guild - smart contract needs and schedule/cost considerations
- ops guild - how to implement and roles/responsibilities
- research guild - positives and negatives of each approach, potential consequences or risks
- draft versions of the tokenomics proposal and research outputs to be transparent and shared for community feedback periodically throughout process
- use aave group process for determining the initial allocation (grant request)
- a champion is probably needed to lead the initiative indefinitely once/if proposal passes
- treasury guild could be in charge of overseeing the allocation of revenues on periodic basis
Separate issue that came up:
- need to determine treasury asset management strategy (whether incoming revenue is kept in that asset or converted to ETH, stables, etc... and proportion of each to maintain)
- proposal from AAJ was to hold mostly ETH as store of value and collateralize/borrow for needed funds in stablecoin, worked great in a previous project
Action items
Tip: Type
@ followed by the name of a teammate to assign them to a task below.Initial draft of the snapshot proposal (davoice321)
Estimate of the time/work and needed contributors for scope squad in Notion (Kouros)
Review of the snapshot proposal and feedback for refinement (treasury guild or other interested tokenomics stakeholders)
Post meeting notes for dev guild input and cross collaboration (tomahawk and Icecool)