Actually, I appreciate your terseness; concise and well-constructed, it helps me identify what you’re actually wanting and I can ask questions on my own time.
I’ve just spent some time reading everything I could find about KeeperDAO (the DAO from which ROOK originates) on their website. It’s a very exciting read, as it appears to be exactly the sort of thing I’ve been looking for in DeFi for a while now. It leads me to think that we should support this project a fair bit, since our systems would integrate well together; they have functionality we could certainly make use of, and I’m very impressed with what I see. kCompound is a very interesting concept; I wonder if there’s a way to do something similar with Bancor? (Is that what a derivative is? The concept is fuzzy to me)
I see, in the future, a merger of some kind between KeeperDAO and BancorDAO; maybe forming a DAMO? (Decentralized Autonomous [Mega,Meta]-Organization)
In any case, this proposal has my support. We need to stay on top of this one.
So it is! I never took notice, that’s really neat. Ultimately I still think a trading UI should be one of our lower priorities, but that’s also a perfect example of integration over innovation; we didn’t reinvent the wheel with our limit orders, we just integrated someone else who did it better than we probably ever could, because that’s their focus.
There are other ways to integrate this project that get closer to the core of what I think our focus should be, I’m sure of it. But I’m getting off-topic!
I pulled up the pool balance by token on ROOK and found this to be quite interesting. It’s true that the pool has remained completely full for a longtime but this is in large part because BNT Stakers migrated away from the pool when LM ended, As ROOK Left the pool people were unable to replace the space. Useful stat, i think there is still plenty of liquidity up at those higher token numbers there just isn’t anyone willing to match it on the BNT side since there are pool that offer much better rates. Should pass this in my humble opinion.
Our competition are the other two pools on Uniswap and Sushiswap:
we are currently sitting at ~7M:
The co-investment here would put us at 1.3M BNT since there is already a 1M minting limit on this pool. Given that there is 1.22M in BNT at the moment on this pool, does this mean that this would only open up roughly ~80K in BNT value on the TKN side?
It looks like at its peak this pool held roughly ~40K rook and we are down to ~30K at the moment:
Seems like it might have stunted the volume on this pool? We are only coming into the picture when the size of the trades are ~$18K - ~$19K and only getting 20% of ETH-ROOK trades routed to us:
and don’t get any larger portions send our way. You hit a 10% price impact at > $750K trade sizes and even at those levels we are still at 50%. This makes sense given that the uniswap + sushiswap combined liquidity is ~7M or roughly equal to us. With that said, we should be capturing 50% of trades at the lower levels which we are not at the moment.
You are right, I wasn’t taking into account the current 1M that is already co-invested. Either option (extra 300K or 600K) would put us above the 1M threshold and require 40% quorum.
One of my favorite projects. Apparently Bancor uses KeeperDAO for gas-less limit orders. Also, kCompound is extremely interesting in that it will literally save users from liquidations by providing a collateral buffer allowing the user time to add more collateral, while hiding the true health of their loan from the public
