I just listened to the recent call and heard from Mark about the updates that the contributors have been working on.
Does this idea not seem somewhat similar to Uniswap v3? I’m sure there are some differences, and perhaps there are things which I misunderstood, but from what I gathered, similar to uniswap v3, the LP is able to decide between a price range that they want their position to participate within.
Am I missing something here? or what did I get wrong?
Also, I was really hoping that within Marks discussion, the contributors would have come up with some new features for the BNT token so that it would become more desirable and result in a boost of organic growth. When the BNT token outperforms TKN, IL & the deficit reduces. So shouldn’t this issue be given some focus from the contributors?
The work being performed, is good for the bancor protocol itself in the long run, and those that are defi savvy will be able to benefit from what Mark discussed, however, the average Joe who sets and forgets probably wont gain much from what Mark discussed, nor will it increase the demand for the BNT token from new users and investors.
Bancor is in deficit because a large amount of BNT was released from ILP and sold onto the market. The high APY % was removed from the BNT token removing any reason for individuals to buy the BNT token. Should we not try to figure out a way to increase demand for the token ? I do not understand why this issue is not at the forefront of work being discussed and worked on.
Furthermore, the DAO has chosen to temporarily disable ILP. Not permanently remove it. Should the team not be working on solving this issue and find a way so that ILP can be restored?
I really don’t want to complain, and I’ve been biting my tongue…fingers… for quite some time now. I’m not the brightest person here, but I do understand the problem that we went though, and I see and hear the ideas being worked on, and I cant help but feel that the contributors aren’t trying to fix the problem we went through, nor repairing the deficit, but rather, just improving the protocol, so that one day, the protocol will work well and hopefully by then, providing that the BNT keeps pace with the market, that everyone will be made whole one day. Yes improving the protocol will help repair the deficit over the long run, but why are the main causes of this deficit being ignored and brushed under the rug?
The BNT token IS the problem. Mass supply increase. No demand. No reason for anyone to buy it.
When BTC goes parabolic, of course the BNT token will increase in price, but will it keep pace? If not then the only thing mooning will be the deficit and our impermanent loss. @mbr what are you doing about the BNT token?