Proposal go to go. Got my vote 
I think we should hit the merger even in light of recent events.
3 Likes
Would they even have us at this point?
So unfortunate.
1 Like
TIME → MEMO → WMEMO → SPELL
Omar Dhanani → Michale Patryn → Sifu → WSifu
Shape shifting is described as evil in many religious works.
When exaclty is the vote ?
I dont like this proposal, its confusing.
Instead check out this proposal. Its simple and gives rewards in stable coins daily.
1 Like
I’m not sure what to say. How exactly will, we, the investor benefit of all this? Most of us are here to make money and you basically stop receiving a 50-80k APY in favor of 30% APR on a different project.
Also, why don’t you want to actually strengthen Wonderland itself and focus on increasing the price, rather than transforming it into Abracadabra.
TL:DR
What’s in it for us, the investors, if we vote yes.
I wanted to be part of a venture capitalist community and not of a defi-plattform. I would have invested in Spell in the first place if I wanted to do so. Get your team/staff together, sort the mistakes out and use the treasury for good investments not for liquidity of abracadbra…
If the merger goes through, the SPELL tokens will be claimable via the Wonderland app on Avalanche
1 Like
I want this proposal to pass after these dark days.
Right now 80k apy is not making any money people. Your 1 cookie becomes to 2 cookies, but your money stays the same. ----> 1 cookie = 100USD (price per cookie is 100usd) , 2 Cookie=100 usd (price per cookie is 50 usd).
But with this merge we will get our share from the treasury. Our 1 cookie will bring us real money not more cookies. 1 cookie=100usd —> 1 cookie + revenue = 110usd
Bright days are ahead, stay frog people 
Confusing means you have the opportunity to step up your game and learn a little more. May as well for you. You have to figure out why you are backing this, or not. Re-listen to the AMA linked above. Check the info you might learn some cool things that may surprise you. Or not. [WIP #3] - A United Front: Abracadabra + Wonderland Merge - #470 by NeighRider
No! Anything that’s tainted by Sifu is dead in the water. How about Wonderland buys out abracadabra and fires Sifu. I do see a lot of upsides from this, especially if the liquidations go into the Wonderland Treasury. First, we got to get our house in order though before we make any huge moves!
2 Likes
There is no way Abracadabra users are going to vote yes to this after the sifu scandal. this is a terrible idea… either distribute treasury to holders or make wonderland work with significant changes
1 Like
Where can I vote…? Don‘t see a Voting Option
Can someone ask my points of contention?
“Points of Contention:
-
Time founders only hold 5% of the project while spell founders hold 30%. We would essentially be gifting Dani and Sifu $240,000,000 just by agreeing to send our treasury over to Spell
-
Time earns compounding interest. Spell does not and we would also be paid at a much lower APY
-
Time generates more money per day than Spell. Sifu himself said 1M per day for our treasury (probably 600-700k with the market down) vs. spell who just made their first profit ever last week for 140k
-
Merging with spell would increase the number of holders, meaning the same VC would be split amongst more people → Less rewards per person, more time to recover just our initial investments
-
If we wanted invest in spell, we would have done so back in October/November when we invested into Time. If we had done so we would have a much larger bag than what is being proposed now.
-
Speaking of proposed now, mergers usually require a PREMIUM price for being bought out. Why would we EVER except fair market value price for time?? Instead of 40k wmemo it should be 100+k wMemo.
-
This will only lengthen the time to recoup long term holders initial investments. For example, I myself invested ~12k into time wonderland that is currently worth about 4k. When Sifu said that 1wmemo would pay out ~2k, I was looking at $200/month or about 2-3 years to make back my initial investment (assuming price stayed the same). Now we we would be looking at 4-5+ years at the rate of spell or spell would have to rise from $0.008 to $0.0229 to break even. This would be much worst for people who bought the top of the market.”
After going through the information I’d say lets not proceed with a merge keep the ships as they are and leverege the different projects strenghts and weeknesses to balance them out if they are seperated they can’t be a single point of failiure for the Frog Nation. Each individual would make their own risk profile by investing in whichever protocols they want. That way I think it would be best for everyone. Not consolidating the risk, but diversifying it in an ecosystem of products for the Frog Nation. Long Live Frog Nation!
I just got an idea! I´m not a coder or a developer so perhaps someone can help me answer if this is possible to do. Is it possible to change the protocol so it functions like this: When borrowing against Your collateral, would it be possible to have the rebase rewards automatically repaying a certain amount let´s say 50% repay and 50% increase Your holdings? Please help me elaborate if You think it´s worth a thought.The main idea is automatically self-repaying loans.
I don’t think you understand that rebases are just stock splits bro.
1 Like
Please pay everyone who got liquidated below Daniele like you said you would, at least everyone under 25k
After that we can talk about the proposals
Yes, I do understand that but the main idea is the auto self repaying loan. Thank You very much for Your answer, I love this interaction. So let´s explore this a bit further to look at what is possible and not. Would it be possible to implement some form of yield farming or interest earning from collateralized assets which could be setup to auto repay by the user him/her-self or someway setup by the protocol. One of the advantages I see if we can figure out a way to do this is that we could reduce the higher risk that´s associated with borrowing against Your assets slightly or significantly depending on the setup. Another question I wonder about is: What do You think of dynamic increasing staking rewards over time to incentivize long time holding?