Looking at the chart on Dune, there’s a steady downward trend, and both $ value (above $50m at the time of writing) and deficit percentage are at an all-time high, which is the worst possible combination (I would argue percentage is always the clearer reflection of the protocol’s actual state).
It seems disingenuous and illogical in the extreme to suggest that LPs who’ve remained in the protocol aren’t in a worse situation than before for having stayed, and that an extension of the same deficit fix methods that have been in place and led to this decline (with the extensions deployed on smaller chains, with lower volume, and without exchange fees) will fix things when said methods have yielded no positive results for the deficit thus far.
I’m with many others on here in that this is essentially reactivating ILP with instead of a 7-day withdraw delay, it’s a 90-day delay function by way of Carbon. Its functionally no different than 2022, even if a smaller scope, and its because of this first-mover advantage that we all are suffering from various forms of deficit. Remember, parties like Celsius and Three Arrows Capital (both frauds btw) were first in line for the 7-day delay and withdrawing massive positions, resulting in significant BNT minting that hurt everyone else. Without the “pause” BNT would have been diluted away for anyone behind those two, resulting in all of us virtually getting wiped out. Further, burning matched BNT within the system and reminting it on the open market is not zero-sum, its net negative in terms of the deficit. This reads to me as an attempt to create a liquidity event to cover personal deficits, i.e. ILP.
Speaking in probabilities, the highest probability event if this is implemented is a race to migrate for those few aware of the event, many left unaware and/or scam events along the way (“deposit in this contract for BNT” etc.), “new” TVL on Carbon composed of resentful users that will perform no trades, a mass-withdrawal event at the 90-day mark that primarily benefits those who are first by selling BNT as soon as possible, harming anyone even marginally behind, and most to those who are still in the LP pools. More crucially, as @yudi alluded to, finite development time/effort is spent constructing this scheme, diverting resources away from more productive matters (opportunity costs) towards new contracts that in my mind will cause harm, thus resulting in a significantly negative NPV while introducing non-zero fatal contract risk which could result in significant harm to everyone.
That’s not what I said - I said that whoever leaves the protocol with this solution in place, makes it worse for whoever is left behind. And for the record, many people who stayed (in many other pools) ended up with much better situation (left with the entire position), so there are 2 sides to this coin. It can go either way.