Proposal to increase the trading liquidity limit in the PHTR pool from 400,000 BNT to 800,000 BNT

The PHTR pool requires some commentary. It was first whitelisted in January with a 100K BNT funding limit; the proposal was authored by @Oliver, a co-founder of the project and the head of product development. The vote was passed with a 72.96% majority and 52.06% quorum.

Not quite a month later, a second proposal appeared from @Oliver seeking to 4× the trading liquidity with an increase in the funding limit to 400K BNT. The vote passed with a 100% supermajority and a 50.91% quorum.

This proposal seeks to 2× the trading liquidity, marking an 8× increase since the original 100K BNT funding limit included in the original whitelisting proposal, in less than three months. While not alarming in and of itself, it is a good moment to pause and reflect on the health of this relationship. I want to draw attention to the rationale offered by @Oliver in the new proposal:

There are some important take-home messages contained within this section:

  1. PhutureDAO has identified Bancor as both its primary liquidity provider, and treasury management solution.
  2. PhutureDAO requires a well-established liquidity base from which to build index products, and other financial instruments.
  3. PhutureDAO recognizes the value of IL protection as the only effective way to maintain a buy and hold return profile, while maintaining liquidity for the PHTR token.
  4. The necessity of the insurance payouts to be taken in BNT if PHTR diverges in price to the upside, is acknowledged, and treated with respect. BNT is identified as being an easy token to handle, due to the magnitude of its on-chain liquidity and distribution.

These are strong anecdotes in support of PhutureDAO’s knowledge and understanding of the Bancor product, and its utility to their project. Although the pool has grown much faster than I expected it to in when considering the whitelisting proposal in January, the momentum is justified. Sentiment is positive; users on Twitter from both communities have posted about the developing dovetailing of our project’s goals (see: here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and so many more).

The Automaton will vote FOR increasing the BNT funding limit of PHTR.


Proposal to increase trading liquidity limit in the FODL pool from 100k BNT to 250k BNT

The Automaton will vote FOR increasing the BNT funding limit on FODL.


Really appreciate the in-depth feedback. I’ll try to answer each below:

You’re first paragraph description is spot on. We were founded as a supply chain project with our flagship, implementation partner SyncFab. We worked together in implementing their full end-to-end manufacturing blockchain platform & MFG token integration connecting OEM/manufacturers and suppliers. The platform has been live since 2019 and is already being adopted by a variety of large enterprises in the aerospace, space, defense, automotive & medical industries. Some key notable clients/partners include Lockheed Martin, Sikorsky, Kencoa Aerospace, NTMA, SWISSMEM, LUCID, etc. You are welcome to learn more about SyncFab and their platform below:

The MFG token is used on the SyncFab platform to access a variety of their blockchain services which you can find and understand easily below:

Beyond enterprise supply chains, Smart MFG has begun a new set of initiatives to expand the ecosystem for a variety of consumer facing products.

We began with our liquidity mining (aka LP Rewards) dashboard. We started our first 6 month LP campaign back in Oct 2021 & and we are planning on starting a new 6 or 12 month campaign for the same Uni v3 MFG-ETH pair immediately after our campaign ends at the end of March. In addition, we are looking to expand our LP campaigns for our other liquidity pools. By Q3-Q4 2022, we are hoping to run 2-3 LP campaigns concurrently which will likely include our Uni v3 USDC & DAI pools.

Our next and biggest project with be our NFT Marketplace (called Phigital) which will have a central focus on 3D NFT assets & interoperable Metaverse NFT assets while still catering to the general NFT art assets as well. While SyncFab’s hardware tokenization service solely caters to enterprises, Phigital will be accessible for the general public. Our official marketplace isn’t live, so the “Galaxy Phantom” NFT you were referring to is from our sample page. When you click on any of the buttons on the sample page, you will be presented with a contact form to join our closed beta group when its live (expected for early Q2).

The Bancor whitelisting will allow us to help diversify our liquidity across multiple platforms. In addition, we have been a long time partner and supporter of the Bancor team & wanted to help cross promote their latest Bancor 3 platform to our community and felt this would be a great starting point. We are committed to providing the optimal MFG stake necessary for our Bancor pool if this proposal is approved. :pray:

Alot to unpack here, but I hope this answers all of your questions or concerns. Feel free to reach out if you need further clarity on anything else. Thanks again for your feedback and support. I may actually use some of your feedback to further improve our site content around the MFG token and its use cases. :+1:

Kind Regards,

Henry Min
Chief Operating Officer | Smart MFG


I wonder if we could discuss setting up an auto-compounding incentives scheme on Bancor V3? Let me know if you have time to discuss it - I would gladly schedule a call with you about it.

The reason I bring it up is that there are some significant advantages from the project side, including:

  1. The entire LM budget is liquid from the first instant.
  2. Users receive their rewards without paying gas to claim them, and without having to interact with a contract.
  3. The rewards for users accrue to the pool token, which in many jurisdictions is a capital gains event rather than income, which alleviates a huge tax burden (and therefore potential selling pressure on the token).
  4. The rewards are 100% single-sided, period. Nothing is required to be sold to fund the other side of the pool during compounding.

The details are discussed in the BIP15 Proposal. Let me know if you want to set up a call :smiling_face_with_three_hearts:


Thanks for the suggestion MBR, I would be happy to discuss with you further, but not likely until around Q3. I’ll have a read of your very informative BIP15 proposal. :+1:


Hey Mark I understand your concern and why everyone saw this as a bad move but reading more into the protocol I quite like it and I think there was a big misunderstanding, I can see on etherscan the CVX was bought with USDC over time. GnosisSafeProxy | Address 0xdff2aea378e41632e45306a6de26a7e0fd93ab07 | Etherscan

This USDC is from the intial Token Sale that raised just under 7K ETH. Majority is held here: DeBank | Your DeFi wallet

Perhaps we could talk about allowing a good amount of liquidity in exchange for their treasury staking their ETH with us as well.

1 Like

1 Like

Always prepared to talk :sunglasses: how well do you know these guys?

not well, just really intrigued by their project after going through it. I spoke with them and they do seem keen to try again tho.

Are delegators still reporting how they are voting?..