Buybacks vs Rage quit, why I think buybacks are better

Rage quit as defined shouldn’t happen, I think a solution that everyone would be okay with would be buybacks of wMemo below and up to backing. As buying below backing increases every holder’s wMemo / treasury ratio, which as a result of the treasury buying back wMemo at a lower price than backing and burning it, every holder owns a larger portion of the treasury. So rage quitters would be able to sell at a price close to or at backing, and it would also positively affect wMemo holders’ proportional ownership of the treasury.

Also just to point out, there would be no downside to the individual investor in this scenario. Lets say no buybacks happened and no rage quits occurred. The treasury / wMemo ratio completely determines the amount of earnings that each individual investor gets from treasury’s earnings, relative to their quantity of wMemo. If buybacks BELOW and up to backing do occur, let’s say with wMemo at ~$20k, the treasury would be buying back wMemo for about half of the backing price. So the extra $20k or so between the value of the wMemo that is bought back, and the backing value of wMemo, would effectively be split between the rest of wMemo holders. This essentially increases their percentage owning of the treasury, making their percentage of the treasury’s earnings increase.

One of the common arguments against buybacks that I’ve seen is that people can frontrun them to game the system. My counterargument to this, is that even if buybacks below backing are front run, the treasury is still buying wMemo back at a value below backing, thus still increasing the individual investors percentage of the treasury. If buybacks ABOVE backing were to happen and be front run, that would be horrible, as it would result in the treasury losing money. However, at any price below backing the treasury is still effectively saving some money, so it is still a much more favorable choice than simply handing out the backing value of wMemo straight out of treasury pockets.

tldr: alternative rage quit option, instead of liquidating treasury, treasury buys back UP to backing price to allow people that are “trapped” to sell, and would also increase the individual investors’ percentage of the treasury’s earnings (resulting in a higher % of earnings for the individual investor than without buybacks below and up to backing)

Way to lazy to read: if it’s a good price for anyone to buy in, it’s a good price for the treasury to buy in too

Final note: if you agree/don’t, pls share to other frogs. the more opinions the better, dao ftw


bro you can’t even format a paragraph properly, nobody is reading this!

Agree, you should make it more readable.

I’m sure you have good ideas, but you will need to make it easier to read.

I have asked myself the question, Why are we not discussing Buy Back options to Honor backing?

The true win-win rage quit option should be based on the initial purchased dated price, not a fixed buyback price, therefore the whales won’t be able to raid our treasury.

Most of the long holders who wish to exit are small investors, the total of their initial investment would be a small fraction compared to the total payout to whales with fixed buyback.

So, would you rather let whales raid our treasury with buyback or let them exit according to their purchased price? No more no less!

With the help of a mod I was able to fix the formatting, sorry! I kinda threw this proposal together as quick as I could so I wouldn’t forget my train of thought while writing it and may have hastily posted it before formatting it haha.

Formatting is fixed, feel free to read it now if you’d like!

Have you considered that if many people rage quit (definitely a large number of people), the assets of the treasury will plummet, this time will cause a new round of FUD, wonderland will have no money to invest and farm, and will die again

Hi, In the case where many rage quit and decide to sell, while the treasury is funding buybacks to maintain backing price, the treasury would still be buying wMemo at a price lower than backing. Essentially, every time the treasury buys back from the market at a price lower than backing, it gets to keep the remaining funds that make the difference between market price and backing price. So if the treasury bought all wMemo in existence at ~20k price, we would still be left with half of the treasury

I agree that buybacks are the better option, but before starting with them we need to have everything prepared to not get exploited by whales I have a plan and other catalysts to keep price above the backing.

Good thoughts.

There are so many misconceptions about buybacks,

People need to understand the purpose of buybacks is to increase backing per wMEMO and not to immediately boost the price or stop it falling below backing.

Buybacks are long term value creation

1 Like

This topic was automatically closed 7 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.