I am suggesting that it is important for us to devise a plan specifically for the wbtc pool for the following likely scenarios
BTC either goes on a major rally
if the BTC ETF gets approved.
In both events, its likely that BTC will greatly outperform BNT, and that the deficit would also skyrocket out of control.
We can ether shut down the wbtc pool in the event of an etf approval , we can shut down the btc pool in the event that the wbtc deficit increases by X %. Other suggestions would be welcomed.
We should not wait until the damage has been done to then attempt at figuring out what to do next. This is the relaxed mindset that got us into this mess. ILP failing was a known possibility, but failing to have a plan and react to its failure accordingly was what truly caused this big mess. Lets not go there again
It’s an LP pool, but the DAO voted to divert 100% of fees towards the protocol to buy/burn BNT, so shutting the pool down wouldn’t result in any lost income for anybody, no matter how much trading occurs in the WBTC pool.
Yes, agree that this proposal makes sense, especially with Bitcoin halving coming up within 6 months. WBTC is one of those pools where the deficit value is so large that it feels effectively un-recoverable if it goes any higher, based on what we’ve seen over the last 16 or so months of deficit.
My opinion is that the percentage increase % trigger (or a "deficit reaches X% trigger) makes more sense. When the Cointelegraph fake news tweet came out in October, BTC boomed 10%+ in a matter of minutes, even with no major legit news outlets reporting it. I can only imagine real news would have the same, or greater, effect. Plus, I’m not quite clear how a pool could be speedily shut in the event of news. Like, what’s the specific trigger to automatically confirm that if we don’t expect someone to manually monitor newswires 24/7 and click to shut it down? “Reuters_reports_Bitcoin_ETF_approved=true”? Whereas I would hope that it’s easier/more feasible to automatically run a WBTC pool percentage deficit calculation in the system.
The difficulty is that a pool shut-down is essentially permanent.
The best case scenario is that:
The pool is shut down and
the price of BTC rallies hard, then
the BNT/BTC price ratio returns to precisely where it was before the pool was closed,
therefore allowing the pool to be re-initiated before
a capitulation in BTC relative to BNT, thus resolving the deficit and allowing the pool to be closed forever.
However, some things to consider:
This is a cumbersome and high-touch process, requiring near-perfect timing.
If the BNT/BTC price ratio never returns (3.), then the pool is never re-opened. In which case, the outcome is the same as just withdrawing.
If the BNT/BTC price ratio is overshot (3. and 5.), re-opening the pool may incur a significant arbitrage trade that may be difficult to justify, or at the very least will result in a lengthy governance process.
Perhaps the opposite occurs, and the BTC rally is either a) disappointing or b) relatively non-existent or c) continues to underperform BNT as it has since Q2:
It is reasonable to expect that if the wBTC pool is closed, it will remain so forever.
Even if we timed the re-opening precisely at the BNT/BTC price ratio stipulated above (3.), it makes no difference if the pool was open or closed in the interim. In fact, we would be slightly worse for wear, as closing the pool would mean that whatever value could be captured from the spread is simply not available.
The only reason to close the pool is to signal that its present state is the absolute best it will ever be, in which case
simply withdrawing achieves literally the same thing.
Great answer! Do you know what kind of pool it is? staking/mining? Can you get to the contract? Maybe we should set up a small fund or similiar for all the withdrawls. Does Bancor have a treasury?
This is from my email back in 2021. Probably a different pool, but I think I invested in a couple of em.
This proposal seeks to increase the Co-investment limit from 1.6M BNT to 2.1M BNT for the ROOK/BNT pool.
KeeperDAO is looking to deposit a portion (~6400 ROOK) of their treasury on Bancor. Opening space in the pool will allow for these funds to be deposited on Bancor if KeeperDAO’s proposal passes in their governance.
A larger ROOK/BNT pool will reduce price impact and therefore attract more trades from retail users, aggregators, and professional market makers to Bancor.
