For rewards: just a slightly higher percentage on revenue share. Not apy. Apy on time is already not doing anything now.
If you go for an airdrop for holders, I would go for a locked airdrop (staked wmemo), generating reward (revenue share). If you give people wmemo locked for a year, they will not sell a year later if it’s generating a nice passive income by then. This gives sifu an entire year to make it worthwhile for current holders to keep it staked after that locked year as well.
The purpose of aidropping to loyal holders would be to reduce the sell pressure, rather than add to it.
Sidesteppers have continually tanked the price for a more beneficial re-entry, causing the WL protocol to suffer. The liquidation cascade was bad enough and has already resulted in the loss of many loyal holders. I think it would therefore be wise to make sure the remaining loyal holders are not lost as well. They are the ones that have lost out the most, and because of this I think there is a lot of sentiment that they are getting punished for supporting the protocol the most, as their percentage of ownership has now dwindled through manipulation.
With this in mind, future price increases, I think, are likely going to see us lose many loyal holders through sidestepping in their attempt to re-gain what they have lost, percentage-wise, to bring themselves on par with those that have manipulated the protocol and thereby bringing the price back down. This is why I think it is important we take steps now to minimise this, and such a step should help to reduce that sell pressure.
You make a good point about the ‘locked’ aidrop, although my concern would be that the long-term holders will consider this to be salt on the wound - whilst manipulators enjoy their increased ownership share immediately without any lock-in period, long-term holders have their reward locked over the year. Each time, long term holders are getting the worst deal.
Logistically, I think it would also just be easier to do an airdrop in terms of developer time, rather than creating an extra layer of complexity by adding varied percentages to revenue share based on time-held for a locked reward. That would surely take longer than an airdrop, and would not be able to be done in tandem with a burn if the burn proposal goes ahead.
@kbanna I’m not sure how we get it added as an option for the RFC, but I think it looks as if there is enough interest to at least have it on the table. @Ponzi Is this something you would consider combining with your burn proposal for an option at the next stage?
That’s fine as long as we as loyal holders get more than people sidestepping. All i see right now is a linear downward trend as a result of people trading to re enter at a lower price and the buybacks dont seem to be doing anything except bleeding the treasury. This is really discouraging to be honest. Im feeling like an idiot right about now. The treasury hasnt lost much, meanwhile we have. Over 2/3 of my investment is gone and it’s going to discourage other people, they’ll cut their losses and put it in a blue chip like Eth or BTC.
The airdrop would probably be a better idea since it would not be predictable when we get such rewards for holding and the sidesteppers wouldn’t be able to just pop in at the right time. Wonderland would be a more desirable asset to hold because right now its just another coin.
What’s best for frog nation
Lock up sounds like a good idea. I propose to take the buyback supply out of circulation with a small percentage of it being burnt. The lock up period could vary. I would be opened to locking up those tokens until we are able to get listed on exchanges. We can use that supply to fund the exchange listings. It would be cool to incentivize holders of WMEMO with rebates on sushi swap, borrowing fee discounts on Abra, and boosted APY on Fantom staking pools. Rewarding those who hold WMEMO with exclusive discounts on frog nation affiliated ecosystems. WMEMO could be the membership discount card to these other affiliated projects we work with now.
I like the idea to burn but I think we need to be smart about how we do it. We are now 8 to 9 months from Wonderlands first birthday. We also do not know how long this downtrend in the market will last.
First: Sifu’s team takes a snapshot of last weeks disaster. I mean the very worst point where $Time was below 800 and the waters were solid red and people were jumping ship. Then divide up the total amount that was bought back by the Treasury in 4 groups. 30%, 30%, 10% and 30%.
As soon as the proposal passes.
Burn 30% of total bought back. This will give us an initial bump in price and stabilization.
4.5 months from now (approximately half way between now and Wonderlands 1 year anniversary)
Burn 30% more this will ensure we are keeping somewhat of a price bump and stabilization around midpoint of the year.
Additionally, take the 10 percent of the initial 100% and give to those investors that were in the previously mentioned Snapshot that have stayed with Wonderland through the January blood bath and kept with it to about midway point of the year. (just a small thank you for having faith in the project)
Finally, burn the remaining 30% right before September which is Wonderlands Birthday. This will help keep price up going into holiday season where people are getting bonuses and have extra cash to invest. Hopefully by this time Wonderland has its own PR team and we can do some marketing about all the projects and what all has happened in the last year and we can highlight how the prices is still stabilized creating some more fomo and attract new investors.
TLDR;
Burn 30 percent day 1
Burn 30 percent 4.5 months from now &
Give 10 percent to frogs who did not sell through the January blood bath as a small token of thanks.
Burn 30 percent right at September when Wonderland is hitting 1 year old.
Aloha.
It would be helpful to understand the exact economics of burning buybacks better. But it seems burning, while helpful with dilution/ratios, is not the optimal strategy for maximining value to current holders.
In my opinion, the ideal approach would be to return treasury buybacks to current holders (holders on the last day/hour of the “buyback event”) in the form of restricted tokens using a 1-year daily vesting schedule–this further increases the incentive to hold and creates FOMO around the backing price.
Alternatively, holding buybacks in the treasury until wMEMO trades at a substantial premium to backing, and then gradually selling these buybacks into the secondary market at preset levels, i.e., 1.5x backing, 2x, etc. using a VWAP/TWAP trading strategy (minimizes price impact) would also result in direct realized profits for long-term holders.
Furthermore, repeating buyback/burn over many cycles could lead to a situation where liquidity becomes untenably low—ultimately leading to a dilution event in the future. Conversely, restricted vesting and/or tactical secondary market selling redistributes wealth from new buyers to long-term holders.
Anyway, just my 2 cents. I am more than willing to add detail if there is interest.
– A Reformed Wall Street Trader
This DAO discussion has been submitted as an RFC, please read it thoroughly and assess the new proposal. This thread will be closed.