Incentivize Longer Staking Periods

1. General Discussion
#1

This conversation is meant to be centered around possible ways to incentivize longer staking periods.

After reading about rebase lockups and other similar possibilities, I propose offering APY that is tiered to different timelines and thus different levels of commitment to the project.

To give an example: “yMEMO” could be staked with a year long contract, and offer a competitive APY to facilitate diamond hands. The rebases earned from it are either more yMEMO (to keep the cycle going), or regular MEMO for frogs that want to use MEMO for the passive $$$

9 Likes
#2

What you’re talking about would be tricky with the Protocol equation changes it implies. After all with guaranteed APY that the protocol can’t necessarily meet all the time (no pun intended) that could lead to our backed price dropping to $0.
What this idea you have would translate to is an time dependent unstaking penalty.

  1. Unstaking before 30 days (30% of gains?)
  2. Unstaking before 90 days (20% of gains?)
  3. Unstaking before 180 days (10% of gains?)
  4. Unstaking before 270 days (7% of gains?)
  5. Unstaking before 365 days (5% of gains?)
  6. Unstaking after 365 days: You are a Boss Frog Professional and you deserve a NFT of yourself dancing on on the TIMe you have made
5 Likes
#3

let’s say you have 3 options and want to keep things simple, multiply the APY by a constant:

xwMEMO - 6 month staking lock in contract, rebases at APY * 1.05
ywMEMO - 12 month staking lock, rebases at APY * 1.12
zwMEMO - 24 month staking lock, rebases at APY * 1.25

again, just an example! Perhaps it’s quite hard to code or too many options, but the longer staking periods give the treasury longer amounts of time to make more off the profits from minting.

2 Likes
#4

Again like the APY can’t be higher than it is without bringing the backed price to $0. The only way to really change the system without making the backed price diverge to $0 is to give people less gains than they would have gotten (taking a percentage of their increase in tokens or fixed fee and adding that to the treasury ) which would if anything make the backed price diverge to infinity!

2 Likes
#5

Are you entirely sure that’s the case? By your argument, backed price either goes to zero or infinity, please explain how.

And people aren’t being given “gains” technically, the protocol increases supply and we get a portion of that increase relative to our position.

#6

I mean the backed price will go to either zero or infinity when you unbalance the equation by skewing the APY with either penalties (and increasing it) or by guaranteeing APY that can’t be maintained (and decreasing hit). The way the equations are set currently are the best way because it encourages new token buyers while keeping a steadily increasing backed price. Penalties in general sounds like suit talk to me.

1 Like
#7

staking and being patient for 8-12 months is the incentive. The reward for that is huge. Cant reward ppl for being weak.

3 Likes
#8

I like the idea of custom NFTs for every 30 days you’ve stayed staked so that the longest frog staked has the rarest commemorative NFT. They can be even potentially redeemable later for games being developed on TIME so they have utility or just be art NFTs if Time wonderland gets some popular artists on other platforms to make a few JUST on time. This might even bring new people to TIME or introduce them to it.

airdrops at

30 day of staking

60 day of staking

90 day and so on.

Incentivizing people three ways: They become badges of honor and they become BY DEFINITION unique and rare as the minting is limited to those making it to the 365th, 400th, 500th day of staking And they’re value is is Time/memos

3 Likes
#9

I’m not sure that you can do it with APY incentives, but the possibility of bigger bonding discounts could be very intriguing.

1 Like
#10

Yes! You may be onto something! Minting and bonding incentives for like current stakers would be nice, they would definitely add more momentum to the price risesand it would also mitigate the free falls as no one would want to be locked into a set price for 5 days during a down turn unless the discount is good enough.

Now if they can figure out a way to say make the minting price dynamic and lock the transaction the whole time, but only giving you the minting discount at the minimum of the start price or the end price. That would reaaaaly mitigate downturns because minting wouldn’t stop during downturns in fact it would INCREASE!!! Meaning the project would GAIN money on upturns and pull in minters on downturns!!! They aren’t really losing money they are counting on by guaranteeing that minters ALWAYS make money as theyre selling you a token they’re making and the tokens aren’t even available to trade until the 5 day period.

1 Like
#11

This is also what I was thinking; however with one small tweak whereby the APY would reflect the max APY, and the rebases would ONLY be available to those who locked in. All other terms would reflect a lower percentage of that total APY for the term. I would also add a 1 month term.
Early withdrawal of the funds would result in a penalty and forfeiture of a prorated amount of the rebases.
This way if you MUST withdraw your funds despite agreeing to the prescribed term, then you can, but you won’t get all the rebases. This is the punishment for adversely impacting the other frogs in the community.

1 Like
#12