Proposal: Extend LM Rewards for UNI

[glenn]

Thanks, Tiago. Just wanted to add that I echo the same opinion of @Carlos and others about the purpose of the liquidity mining campaign from the original proposal

@MichalHerzyk

• Uniswap is one of the largest DeFi assets
• Liquidity Mining for Uniswap will bring significant exposure of Bancor technology to the Uniswap community
• Encouraging Uniswap token holders to stake in Bancor will be the most profitable single asset exposure staking opportunity for UNI tokens available on the market.
• Uniswap has significant capital and institutional backers, and getting their attention is a key to push Bancor development further

I think we have met and passed with flying colors the original intent of bringing exposure to UNI holders about Bancor DEX these past ~3 months. We have attracted the most UNI liquidity outside of Uniswap:

and this shows that our LM campaign has had the desired result (I don’t think we will ever have more UNI liquidity in Bancor than Uniswap).

With that said, like in other proposals (YFI/REN/etc…) that have come up for renewal, I have typically leaned against renewing LM rewards for the same pools unless there is a good benefit (in addition to fees which everyone focuses on) for us doing so. Some of the proposals that I have typically backed are the Aave LM (due to us submitting a proposal in their DAO to onboard BNT), wNXM LM (for the low insurance premiums that we get from their DAO by staking against our contract), etc… My thought process for this has always been the following:

@glenn

With that said, fees are not everything and user acquisition is my opinion is more important. If we have to chose between extending rewards on existing pools vs enabling LM rewards for a new pool that would potentially let us bring hundreds to thousands of new users to our platform then we should always vote for the latter since ultimately that’s what we need for growth. Even though we might not be able to make up the cost of rewards in fees during the LM period for a pool, in the long run those new users might stick around and make Bancor their forever home (e.g. you mentioned that:

There are other project out there that we could potentially run LM campaigns for to bring awareness about Bancor. I also think that we take for granted the value proposition of Bancor (single sided staking with IL protection) and even if rewards go away on the pools that some of the LPs will actually stick around. The alternative on other DEXes is worse since they would have to sell half of their stack to LP and if they are long on an asset then that might not make sense.

@tfns

I’d like to suggest that if no interested party comes forward on the governance forum, then the proposal shouldn’t even be put to vote. We should expect the communities to come forward with this kind of proposals, so I’m hoping that at least some UNI holders will comment here. If not, there really is no point in putting this proposal up on snapshot from my perspective.

Perfectly said, other communities that are trying to get whitelisted/co-investment/LM rewards are very active in our telegram and social media channels (we have seen this with 1inch/Lido/Noia recently). The fact that the UNI community didn’t even put in the effort to submit a proposal in our DAO tells me that they don’t really have an interest. I would much rather put in the effort to work with communities that want to collaborate with us then those that don’t.