[DAO Discussion] Avalanche Liquid Staking Proposal 🔺

[kimo]

I would love to see detailed information of the proposing team OR any story of your team with Dani and his team.
When I click your profile @j_rana you joined 8 hours ago to obviously write this post, so to many frogs including me it’s bit surprising and scary.
We would appreciate your people’s information

[Shrop_99_Degen]

Here you go.

https://dao.wonderland.money/t/dao-discussion-avalanche-liquid-staking-proposal/3729/36?u=shrop_99_degen

[benkbva]

dev team should be paid – yes. im thinking a base payout + performance encapsulated in the initial proposal.

[Kevkev_91]

Yeah seems a lot more reasonable as crypto is a very fast moving space and within 4 years things change A LOT and so does performance. Therefore, an approach where you re-negotiate things after shorter time frames and re-evaluate the situation is better in the way that it might correct the path of the DAO in case things go the wrong way or if its on track you hold the course.

[Csar00]

Love the idea but having trouble with two things

1. Split with the team, should be lower. As well as 4 year contract should be 1 year with break clause having no penalties, i would feel allot safer.
2. Trustworthiness of team/more info needed

[John]

I agree 100% with your post ser. 75/25 is too high and 4 years too long.

[Shrop_99_Degen]

Yup, just saw. Though think he was referring to an actual ‘background check’ which would never happen. I could be mistaken.

Still comfortable with the Team knowing they were even able to have a private chat with Sifu and the rest of Wonderland leadership, but if it makes people feel more comfortable he could expand on it a little more.

I think people are making this a bigger deal than it is.

[0xPayton]

You can buy an existing stake pool cheaper than the terms of this deal!!! 25% going to the “management team” AND 10% going to the Wonderland dev team leaving TIME holders with 6.68% return on AVAX with 100% of the treasury exposed to avax volatility AND a 9 M MIM grant. What the actual fuck is this proposal?!? Suits aren’t even this blatantly greedy and I use to work in that world.

[BrazilRules]

Specially when considering they want 6 MIL dollars just to develop it. Seems a bit excessive to me. Are they a huge company or something ?

[Shrop_99_Degen]

Sorry, you have a misunderstanding of what this is. We would be exposing none of our AVAX. We are paying $6 million for this dev team to build Wonderland a platform for other AVAX holders to liquid stake.

Not even sure where you get your numbers from. We would charge 10% of the staking rewards users earn by staking on our platform. 75% of that would then go to Wonderland and 25% would go to the dev team who manages the platform.

[DrakesWheelChair]

why are they taking 25%? that makes not fucking sense. is the team doxxed? give 5% to team that should be more than enough

[iECOMMERCE]

Give em the staked time instead.

[Skrilla]

I agree with your numbers more, The value that wonderland is providing should be rewarded more upon success.

[Skrilla]

Agreed, would like to understand that more. I also think the numbers need to be tweaked a little more in our favor.

[NalX]

To me these types of projects are as Frog Nation as it can be. Removing limits for everyone to have a chance to jump in is Frog Nation 101 if you ask me.

This provides us the opportunity to be the first to give these services on two chains that are generally bullish from what I’ve seen. Potentially even more chains in the future if this proves to be successful.

@j_rana

Additionally, governance over selected validators, fees, other parameters, and matters such as upgrades to the protocol will be carried out by DAO token holders.

Does this mean that Wonderland (the DAO) will have control of this new protocol and will be able to vote on whatever parameters or will that protocol have it’s own DAO with it’s own governance token ?

@j_rana

We propose a 25% revenue share for the first 4 years of operation (i.e. 75% of revenue to Wonderland, 25% to the team), falling to a 15% revenue share thereafter.

I’m not opposed to the 25% revenue share. As mentioned, I think both teams need to be incentivized. Wonderland making 3/4 the profits should be enough to cover the risk of the investment and the team making 1/4 of the profits keeps them motivated to ensure it’s success and improve the protocol.

However, as other people have pointed out, 4 years can be a long time. I think a review of some sort midway (2 years) would ease the community and still work for the team should they deliver as expected.

@j_rana

To further protect Wonderland DAO, we propose a break clause (if voted by the DAO), of whichever is larger of 10M USD, or the last 12 months’ revenue multiplied by 3.

I have an issue with this break clause. What would we be breaking off from ? Paying the rest of the investment ? I believe for the break clause to be more fair it should also take into account that if the team doesn’t deliver we should be able to back out without penalty. If we back out because our DAO decided not to honor the deal, then a penalty seems fair.

As mentioned above, I think a two year review of the terms could be interesting. For example, we agree to the current terms, in two year if everything goes as expect or that whatever issues that came were not the team’s fault, we continued as agreed. If after two years, the DAO is not satisfied of the team’s performance as they did not deliver what was agreed upon, we just be able to break the contract or renegotiate if required. Something to keep both sides accountable.

@j_rana

To build both the Avalanche project and subsequent Fantom project, we propose a one-off grant in order to retain the team, structured either as $6M MIM (granted half at agreement and half upon delivery), OR $9M (staked) TIME (vested linearly over 24 months), as the Wonderland DAO prefers.

Sounds like a buy one get one free deal, so that’s cool. As mentioned, expanding this to other chains in the future would be great!

Personally, I would prefer the 6M MIM. Giving staked TIME would be giving “significant” voting power to a team that still has to “prove themselves” to us. Giving staked TIME also open the possibility of them dumping.

@j_rana

We believe our collective experience is uniquely suited to bringing liquid staking to the Avalanche ecosystem for Wonderland, and presents an exciting opportunity to work together

Overall, I think this is a good opportunity and hopefully a relationship that can be extended in the future should this come to fruition.

This also could allow further development for Abra and the whole ecosystem.

[NalX]

The way I see it, the value is the product they are building for us. Two of them actually. Buy one get one free.

[Glennbirto]

I’m all in to this as long as user guides are produced for users with less knowledge on the functionality of all the benefits and how to physically do it, to make it work

[0xPayton]

You should make that clear. That is a brilliant idea and much better terms.

[Skrilla]

I think this all sounds great. It is definitely a Great market to capitalize on. Especially with the growing rate of the AVAX Chain.

My counter offer/ Number issues

• 75/25 revenue share needs to be changed more in favor to wonderland, considering the value we are putting upfront. I think 85/15 sounds more then fair.

• Upfront payment would prefer it to be 7.5 mil in $Time, for 24 months staked. This also gives more incentive for $Time to do well. If Time does well devs do well.

• The break clause should be lowered, As it is only a 2 year contract now. 1/4 of the upfront value provided by DAO, seems fair. As we are already paying 7.5 mil in $TIME. We would pay another 1.875 mil to cancel the contract. This Makes the investment much safer on our side, because if it does fail we would not be getting hit as hard.

Everyone Voting on this needs to remember, The only one taking a risk is us(we are fronting all the money), so if this fails we all take the hit, the goal is to minimalize the risks as much as possible, Well still being reasonable and incentivizing, for Teams to work with/for us.

I Also would like a more clear view on what we would be paying 2 years worth of work for. How many employees? what actually needs to be done/moderated? What is the actual work being done? Tell me why you think your team deserves 15% of our revenue to continue work on this project for years to come.

Thanks

[rinseagain]

Shouldnt a background check be kinda needed in this sort of bussines engagments? Have no knowledge as they do but plenty of us here trust Daniele and the fact we know who he is and Sifu has done a lot to gain the trust of Frog Nation.