I too prefer option 1. We deserve to get as close to full backing as possible as that is what wmemo represents.
But I do think its reasonable to not have full backing so holders do get rewarded for being loyal, so Option 1 fits the bill.
The mechanism I prefer is the one where SkyH doesn’t need to rely on others to execute.
My question would be, when will there be the first redemption? I think it makes sense to have one immediately and then in line with the TM review periods as they are also quarterly.
The first redemption can occur once we move to WIP and if the proposal passes. After that I would assume as soon as possible, obviously keeping it on a quarterly basis (January, April, July, October).
If my math is correct it would add another $2069 to each wMemo’s redemption value. This is based on the following calculation. 1.5 billion BSGG/5800 wMemo in circulation. Multiply this by 25% redeemption value. Multiply again by current fair value of BSGG $0.032 = $2069 per wMemo. Someone please double check my math, lol.
If liquid backing is 35k and full backing is 48k, 25% of the difference is about 3.25k (which would be added to the illiquid backing to get around 38.3k).
I think SkyH should confirm the official amount anyway and add it to the full RFC post under Option 1
Right but some of the illiquid backing includes VC projects, locked CVX, etc. Also you need to exclude the BSGG in the farm as thats not being deployed.
Question, so for Option 1, how would that apply for future redemptions? Will we have 25% of remaining BSGG for Redemption 2 and so forth? What about future illiquid assets besides BSGG?
In order to “future proof” this proposal we may need to leave some discretionary decisions going forward to the TM. Overtime new assets will be added to farming and some assets may become locked or illiquid as we obtain new VC projects, so the TM may need to decide at their discretion how to deploy redemption assets in a equitable manner. This assumes, of course, that the community decides on a redemption that includes a portion of illiquid assets which does complicate the matter.
@Deal Could you please edit your post so it’s clearer for the discussion?
Let’s call the 2 redemption implementations A and B.
So going forward, can everyone state whether they want Option 1 or 2 for the AMOUNT that is redeemed and Option A or B (or something else) for the way we implement those redemptions.
Redemption amount: Option 1 - for the reasons @ghostzero gave above (and with the caveats mentioned by @Deal in his reply)
Redemption mechanism: Option B, preferably monthly as opposed to quarterly and if this can be kept safe by having a safe to simply change the reference amount and nothing else each month.
The “Non-BSGG Backing” / Number of wMEMO currently is closer to 36-37,000 by my last calcuation, with the number of total wMEMO being a shade under 5900 (and not counting a latest round of buybacks which will tick this slightly lower).
I suggest that the redemption exchange asset to be USDC (or USDC and MIM provided that there isn’t enough USDC) and BSGG (and how that is scheduled is flexible). The portfolio can be reference and the porportional amount of directional exposure can be sold for USDC in preparation for redemption.
In principle, this is in line with “Option 1” with some semantics/logistics suggestions. Please correct me if I have misunderstood.
If this is in MIM/USDC + BSGG - however, I’d suggest that these are bridged over to Avax in order to save gas costs for the treasury.
this is a good question, if we want to make it straight forward and simple, including a specific token and specific percentage that will change as time goes on makes it more complicated.
we could come up with a different way to capture the same amount of value.
For example, you could say:
swap WMEMO for treasury value equal to the average price between “liquid” backing and “Full non-liquid” backing.