Hello, as some of you may have noticed a great majority of the volume in bancor comes from the top pools. These pools are ETH, BTC, USDC, USDT, DAI, and LINK. I propose we increment the length of time for rewards in these pools since they generate the biggest amount of volume for the protocol and therefore the most profit. Additionally, I think something similar to the permanent rewards category in sushiswap would be good for establishing a more permanent liquidity in what I would call “blue chips” or “majors”.
5 Likes
I also think it would be beneficial to have longer extensions on the major pools, or at the very least there should be more open discussions about what lies ahead.
In the last LM rewards extension thread, Michal mentioned that the rewards program would have to be “rewritten and adjusted” after the implementation of an innovation solution (presumably Vortex). Rewards expire in 2 weeks and it’s unclear what the next step is. Bancor is designed to incentivizes long-term liquidity, but many LPs could be turned off by the short-term reward design. It’s hard to imagine that people would supply liquidity to a pool with rewards expiring in 14 days if the full multiplier can’t be earned until 28 days (especially with gas prices lately, though hopefully L2 solves that).
Over the last few days I’ve seen many questions on Discord and Telegram asking about rewards expiration, and I have to imagine that there are tons of other users that close out of the staking page when they see the current expiration. Any type of assurance of longer-term rewards would attract more liquidity and be great for marketing. The plan is to offer LM rewards for 72 weeks, but I’m sure the majority of users think it’s much less when they visit the site!
I tend to agree. However it could be a good idea to make the LM rewards go down over time. As the network grows, the bnt price should go up along with the trading fees. Hence the trading fees might become more dominant with the increase in volume, which could be compensated by a reduction in LM rewards over time. A 10% reduction of LM rewards every month would work. that way, there won’t be a sudden drop in apy from 40% to 5% as might be the case without any extension. This sudden drop could lead to a big amount of liquidity leaving bancor, which isn’t beneficial for the protocol. Don’t forget what got us to 1b liquidity in such a short amount of time. LM works, Don’t change the winning team. The clock is ticking, we don’t want to let it go down to 0 
3 Likes
Let’s get this proposed and voted on, or at least a stopgap extension in the form of a continuing resolution ASAP
1 Like
I agree with this, all thats needed is to keep rewards more competitive than other ecosystems like sushi
1 Like
Don’t think we should keep the 70/30 ratio for stable pools if an extension is put up for vote. 80/20 or 70/20 with10% for vBNT burn. 30% on stable side is too much that’s why these pools are always full.
Sure I’m good with lowering it but gotta keep in mind these 5 pools make up around 75% of all the volume and liquidity getting lower in the pairs would result in lower volume since a lot of trades come from routers, correct me if im wrong.
ETH, WBTC, Stable and the huge link pool are very important to Bancor. The problem with the stablecoin pools … IL is actually permanent loss for Bancor if the BNT price keep going up, hence the suggestion with lowering the TKN side.
Hopefully more of a permanent proposal or at least a 100 days+ extension rather than the mini 30days.
1 Like
I agree with the extension of these pools and of course making them longer than 30 days.
Seen enough people worry on forums on when these rewards will end ( I think only we extensively invested in the project know that they’ll be extended anyway).
I would like to have a clear distinction on which pools we’ll extend and which not. The below pools should defintely be extended as they provide our biggest volume and will key in making Bancor the defacto dex.
I don’t necessarily agree with extending the RenBTC pool and Ocean Pool though.
They have far too little volume to make the extension worthwhile in my opinion.
Thus I would like a proposal that excludes those two.
If people from the Ocean and/or RenBTC community want to extend these pools, they can of course open a different proposal.
4 Likes
I agree aswell i don’t see a reason to extend renbtc or ocean
1 Like
It’s great to see some lively discussion here!
I would be interested to hear @mbr @MichalHerzyk and others closely affiliated with the project to chime in. I’m hesitant to see anything put up to a vote before getting their input since it sounds like they’re working on their own proposal to address rewards expiring.
I like the ideas in this thread around switching stable pools to 80%BNT/20%TKN and/or gradually reducing LM rewards over time. However I think we’d want to do much more rigorous analysis before implementing anything like this for this rewards cycle. For now I’m in favor of a simple renewal of rewards anywhere from 30-100 days (unless the team drops a new proposal in the next few days).
It’s an interesting idea - and @MichalHerzyk is working on a new LM proposal as we speak.
The main issue is the stablecoins; these represent a huge cost to the protocol. Luckily, I am actively researching a better solution for these, and have made a lot of progress since work started in December. We will have some interesting stuff to show the community in the coming months that I think you will be excited for.
Stablecoins aside, I am in support of a system that reduces the LM emissions over time, while maintaining a strong incentive for LPs on the platform. I prefer to steer away from words like ‘permanent’; however, the concepts laid out above do have merit, and it sounds like the DAO is unanimous in its conviction that LM should be extended on the most important assets. So of course I support it, although the specific implementation should be backed by sound economic analysis. I have seen what Michal is working on, and I am confident that everyone will be pleased with what our resident economist is proposing.
You don’t need to be patient - this will be published within the next day or two, hoping to push on chain after the weekend.
5 Likes
Sound arguments, @mbr .
Fully agree with not making them permanent.
It’s also a good idea to slowly trickle away from the LM rewards too, as to counter inflation.
Excited to hear what the solution will be for Stable Coin pools.
1 Like
agreed, excited to see what the brains are conceptualizing, the thread was less about a vote more about discussing it. also, making stables profitable ? there might be a really good opportunity for lending there, specially if it can be insured through the same mechanics used for IL. – obviously there is more protocol level risk, but im confident the team could pull it off.
1 Like