don’t be offended by what I’m about to write…
but,
why do we want traders looking after a treasury?
2 Likes
I will vote for this we need firm assurance that the APY and rebases would be keept as long as possible while they’re implementing a burning mechanism to keep this sustainable.
I will agree with assets lock up and yes they speak crypto we’re here for the money 
I’m not here for fuckin chat shit educational talk from a Hedge fund shitty professor I’m here for the Crypto and where’s money can be always more hard working serious people are always welcome.
We killed Two rabbits we will have professionals to look after us, guys that speaks crypto and are capable to handle this mess .
We need this making happening I’m actually very positive about this.
The Bastion proposal above is independent of the Professor/Wonderland 2.0 proposal.
This is just to vote on the Treasurer/CFO. Nothing else.
1 Like
Not sure if you know this, but Sifu was also a trader which generated revenue for the DAO. AVAX, CVX, FTM. He was quite active.
They would be an interim manager for now and in their proposal say we would need to get someone more suitable for any future defi M&A since that’s not their wheelhouse. And this doesn’t mean we can’t bring on other types of investors in the future.
1 Like
Professors’ proposal has absolutely nothing to do with treasury management… 
1 Like
In any well run organization there is accountability of responsible persons / officials. This is achieved by;
- Skin in the game to incentivize positive behavior
- Negative consequences for poor performers / bad actors
Any new proposal must address these points.
First of all, I would rather hire professor and go with his proposal. Please take note that Bastion clearly mentioned that there will be (many, many) times where conflict of interest will happen when they (Bastion) come across opportunities and dont know whether they will keep these opportunities to themselves, or bring them up to wonderland. These cannot happen my men. Whoever we appoint SHOULD NOT HESITATE at all to bring ALL OPPORTUNITIES to wonderland FIRST.
1 Like
I will write in interim comments here:
While, I am a bit unsure how effectively a rage quit option has been thrown into the mix here - as to a rage-quit option:
We’re seeing various iterations voted on, or proposed in this matter including:
- Inverse Bond Introduction
- Rage-quit and “restart” post rage after quitters left
- And even a conversion into Spell (which is a bit of a rage quit as anyone can liquidate Spell for the next token they like)
These all are methods to initially lift the price closer and hopefully above the treasury backing price. Ultimately, we’re all looking at some kind of mechanism to restore confidence in Wonderland - and in principle I agree with this but this is not related to our proposal.
As to our proposal:
We would amend that in line with Wonderland 2.0, we would be happy to go through a vetting process that set by procedure and manage a partial portion of the treasury. There are many ways of producing returns, and different managers bring really different skillsets to make such returns. A multi-strategy investment strategy DAO success would be an excellent model - that really turn all investment models (even in tradfi) on its head. Who wouldn’t want to have the option to be in that?
VC Investments should not be unilaterally decided by Bastion - as its complicated - and those should be brought to all the members of the DAO to decide after the merits and risks are presented.
We seek no keys as our proposal is to see that the DAO (at least for any part we may become so privileged to manager) treasury has the best positions and hopefully good timing on them as we can provide.
Many of you ask why a trading team? To be blunt: to manage any future buy backs. So, we don’t have deal with all these rage-quit and other options because the price fell apart situation in the future. Isn’t this why we’re dealing with a good bit of the problems here in the first place?
3 Likes
If Bastion isn’t a VC firm, this feels like a bridge proposal where the attempts to raise money will be based on arbitrage and managing investors. While thats the minimum required, I think it fails to realize the appropriate value of the Wonderland ecosystem.
In addition, I would like more details on how inverse bonds would be implemented – what will be the floor price? what will be the ceiling price?
I think we can make more money by moving forward with profit sharing in the ecosystem and careful consideration of how to put the treasury money to work to drive for the growth of the ecosystem.
As it stands, I am against this proposal.
1 Like
No time to read? Here’s a full-length audio/video of the RFC and proposal discussion Wonderland Bastion Proposal For Treasury Management [RFC] Full-Length - Vote On Crypto Defi Project - YouTube Trying to provide easy access to information on the project. If you find this helpful, please share and like to bump it up to the top.
@TheSkyHopper - if you find this helpful, please link at the top.
Thanks for the proposal and discussion!
1 Like
That’s a yes from me dog
Update:
I have been looking at the Wonderland Treasury Portfolio.
I think that likely 0xSifu likely was in midst of again rebalancing the portfolio when this end of January liquidations and other FUD was brought into play or - maybe things may been being farmed but assets were put on hold from deployment/redeployment.
To see assets not being utilized or allocated sub-optimally is just tragic. Everyday goes by without users getting money they would have gotten.
Given this, I now change the proposal so that:
I propose to:
- Advise Dani and the current team on optimizing the current treasury portfolio for yield farming with current assets - I do not ask to directly manage the portfolio.
In doing such advisory, I will share all my advice on Discord as well and the rationale behind such recommendations. - Propose an advisory period of 5 weeks (if a proposal can be passed), and subject to renewal at the end of the period.
- Take an incentive fee of 2% of the proceeds of the yield farming (in the case of AMM pools subtract the slippage from Impermanent Loss (IL) from the proceeds) during the period paid in WMEMO, there would be no other fees.
While I’m at it here - let me actually give you my take on the current treasury.
As of right now, there is nominally 720 million USD value in the treasury.
However, there is approximately 195 million USD value in MEMO, WMEMO, and TIME. Tokens that were a result of buy backs etc. Realistically, this should be deducted from both the treasury and market capitalization of TIME - as this is circular and should be offset.
That gives Wonderland roughly 520-525 million US Dollars of Treasury Assets in Net to consider. Of which:
There is 150 million US Dollars (30% of the use-able treasury) in stablecoins which are not in any yield farming protocols including:
MIM: 62 Million USD (which could be making 12-13% in Convex)
UST: 48 Million USD (which could be making 10-12% in Convex-Curve)
USDT: 23 Million USD (which could be making at least 5%-6% at the very worst)
USDC: 20 Million USD (Similarly 5-6% at the very worst).
Furthermore, based on my calculations the MIM-WAVAX pool in Sushi simply isn’t accruing fees enough to cover the Impermanent Loss - and make an acceptable return - and this is 170 million USD of the Treasury. (I’d note this is similar with MIM/ETH as well for another 25 million USD of the Treasury).
If you note here the annualised returns from Jan 29th (I have used this date arbitrarily here, but roughly when the dox-fud occured). The 29th to current annualized return for this LP has been about 7.67%, while simply owning the MIM and AVAX would have resulted in 7.5% gains. That gave the LP a 3.4% annualized net farming yield. Give the node staking on AVAX and the Convex Staking returns for MIM - this can result in far superior returns in all likeliness. In fact, with AVAX was much higher at 91 USD, the LP Pool actually underperformed!
Convex also can be locked (this would be a strategic investment and at 25 USD, seems like a long term hold) for voting and a 3% yield on top (20mm USD).
70% of the net treasury can be easily be redeployed to really benefit users (of liquid assets this is 80%).
So much can be done just now to get extra revenues in to the users! I am now just hoping that this can get to WIP!
3 Likes
this looks great! lets get him advising asap and moving the ball fwd! i am sure he will be a terrific value add!
1 Like
after reading this revised proposal, and seeing firsthand your knowledge of DeFi and farming, staking, I will support this proposal in its revised form.
1 Like
This now feels like a mercenary proposal that will enrich you for activities that I expect the wonderland board would do directly.
If wonderland is outsourcing its treasury management than what exactly is left for wonderland to do?
I continue to be against this proposal.
I have already noticed this from the day the “fund” page was published on wonderland. The kinda question “why do we have stablecoins sitting idly in our treasury, such a waste”. All the things you listed in your posts normally was tasked to Sifu to execute. That’s why after he’s gone I guess nobody in the wonderland team knows what to do with them (stablecoins, native tokens, etc). Hence, another reason why we also organize another thread to bring back Sifu. Because quite obviously, currently every single decision in wonderland takes a month per execution, which sucks big time.
Thanks for this update! Mentioned and linked in today’s Wonderland News roundup Wonderland News Update [14 Feb 2022] DefiDaily AMA, RFC Bastion, Brand Video, Dani & more... - YouTube
1 Like
As you probably read in the Bring Back Sifu thread - its water under the bridge. Personally, I believe if someone can build a 50mm + wealth in crypto, no doubt I think he’s an asset to this dao. However, with so many people pointing fingers with the price action goes bad - and likely attributing to his previous criminal record - (which is totally unfair to him btw) - how is it going to work?
I am trying to address the vacuum caused by his departure.
I agree with The Professor on this:
Bring in a CFO for Treasury Management and include an additional 2 people as multi-sigs to execute a transaction. Disaster relief protocols to be put in place in case sudden death. These people need to be well known in the Defi community and have built up a certain level of trust over time and not groups like Bastion Trading who are in the business of trading and have the possibility to front run execution with their own funds.
Let’s hire The Professor first and have him start developing plans. Wonderland: The Rise, Fall (and Comeback) of the world’s largest DAO. | by The Professor | Medium
At this point, it does not matter who’s replacing him anyway, since he’s no longer interested in the post.
I agree with the change in your proposal and with the professor proposal. I’m just frustrated that we now operating at ONE PROPOSAL A MONTH. At this rate, I feel like wonderland is a retirement home for that little investment I made last dec haha.