Hey guys, I’m going to write something which I hope makes sense. Sorry it’s a bit long, but I am trying to understand stuff and suggest an approach out of the events of these last few days.
There exists a protocol which starts offering a very large APY and begins to gather large amounts of FIAT in exchange for participation. You spend fiat, you get TIME, you stake TIME (MEMO) and from that moment on you lock in a share of the fiat pool. The share is diluted only when new participants bond and therfore obtain a larger part of the pie in exchange for new fiat. All this time the protocol splits TIME (or MEMO) every 8 hrs to maintain the illusion of growth. But the only real growth that matters is the pool of FIAT the protocol controls. So there is N units of fiat (1 billion $) and K MEMO or wMEMO in the protocol. Each wMEMO is essentially worth K/N. After a particulary traumatic event said protocol decides to stop dilution by removing bonds. So now new FIAT can only come in through delivering some form of value that would convince investors to pay more for a wMEMO for a potential future gain. Which is fine, makes sense, you now have a huge amount of FIAT money to play with and you can make it grow.
- What is the point to maintain ANY APY? Splitting MEMO makes 0 sense in this new world. The APY can be 0 or 1 trillion, the pie is the same and each wMEMO is worth the same percentage of the pie
- The protocol could prove it cares about the investors that held during said traumatic event by burning a large amount of wMEMO. Therefore each wMEMO is worth more FIAT. So this puts some percentage of the FIAT pie back into investors hands. If the investors still trust the protocol then they will hold, knowing that future traumatic events will not leave them empty handed. This of course refers to simple (3,3) investors which weren’t looking for lambos on the moon by throwing everyting into 9,9 plays they don’t understand. Can we take a vote on something like this?