Revenue share for the ones that don't unstake

We all know that the tokenomics of TIME as it is, will exponentially create selling pressure over time: the more time passes, the more people want to sell their profits made with apy.

It would be cool having a periodical share of the revenue if you didn’t unstake for a certain period. It would be a good incentive to holding and buying and a great way to start the transition through full revenue sharing…
I can imagine revenue sharing and apy combined could be a mix that will incentivize to use the revenue to buy even more time to get more revenue, that can translate in loops that will increase the buying pressure and decrease selling pressure at the same time.

My idea is that you start staking, each day that passes you gain right over a certain percentage of the revenue you shoud have as a holder of the protocol, a very small percentage, like reaching 100% in 3/4 of the runway if you never unstake.

_more buyers;
_less sellers;
_smoother transition to revenue sharing paradigm;
_we’ll be the first to do so and we’ll attract attention
_if revenue shares will be given in form of shares of the other parts of echosistem (MIM->sushi->popsicle), it will inheritely strenghten the echosistem itself becouse the people who are already interested in it will be more and more invested in it

_giving revenue shares will lower the global APY (i think), if everybody stops selling and reaches 100% revenue rights, there will be no more TIME to be generated
_this could be mitigated by always use part of the revenue to generate more TIME so that 100% of your right on the revenue would be in fact 100% of the revenue dedicated to the holders, so not 100% of the total

I do not see other cons but I’m eager to hear the opinion of the Frog Nation.
PS: This is not refined by any means, it needs much discussion and I really hope together we can refine this in a much more complete proposal
I’d like this post to be treated as a DAO, so that people can modify and refine the main post… since i don’t think this is possible, i will try to read all of the comments and update the post with the ideas that seem to gain more popularity

1 Like

IMO, it would be better to grow the treasury rather provide “dividends” via revenue sharing. The backing per time increases as treasury value increases relative to $TIME token expansion. That should help selling pressure over time as we reduce dilution over time. The larger the treasury, the more high multiple opportunities that Sifu/treasury mgmt can go after and ultimately higher returns via price appreciation of $TIME.

of course, in my vision i see revenue as excess of protocol wealth… the protocol will be always reinvesting wealth, but a certain percentage of said wealth shoud be given to the ones who have shares of the protocol. In other words I’m proposing something less like a joint stock company and more like a limited liability partnership kind of thing, so that one’s involvement into the protocol is not only driven by the future price of the token, but also on how the treasury is managed to grow further, which of course in tourn shoud drive up the price of the token. Like… If a company of which I own some shares plummets for this or that reason, I will sell my shares at a loss and go in my bed crying, but if I invested in a limited liability partnership company, then i will have a right on the earnings of that company and even when the price of my share plummets, I will stay and try to improve the earnings and in the meanwhile I will always earn something, potentially mitigating or nullifying the loss over the share worth, exactly as it happens with apy. The problem with apy is that the concept of owning a certain share of the protocol is of much more difficult comprehension to the most, so they will sell happily theyr shares and be liquidated by others periodically, but the selling pressure will be always there if the only way to get returns of your investment will be by selling your shares. What about a design in which your shares gain value and at the same time you get rich just by holding them? A design like that will put you in a condition in which the most sensible thing to do would be buying more shares with the returns of the shares you already have, to gain more returns and so on, this could drive the price to the cosmos

1 Like

I’m not opposed to distributions of some portion of any underutilized treasury funds. I don’t believe trying to incentivize not selling with small distributions will make much difference though. If holders see better opportunities somewhere else, they’ll shift their assets over to those other opportunities. A small reward for staying in won’t keep them. It may have some small psychological effect, but will largely be irrelevant IMO. In fact, if we are providing distributions vs maximizing our treasury utilization for high value deals, I think folks would more likely go somewhere else. I’m here for 10x deal opportunities. So revenue sharing would probably turn me off as it would be an indication that our treasury management and dao can’t get the deals I’m expecting. It would change my investment outlook for the worse.

I simply vote no not what I signed up for doesn’t matter what the proce does or what sell pressure it creates if we hold we win that simple I would vote he’ll no to this