SLP Preservation/Conversion Specifics

Proposal Discussion
,
1

Following our latest Delegate meeting I’ve put together a proposal furthering the discussion of SLP preservation.

Please provide any feedback:

Currently the BSLDAO SLP is subject to the rise, and fall, of both Ethereum ($ETH), and Hedera ($HBAR).

The HBAR SLP is viewable here: https://hashscan.io/mainnet/account/0.0.7220452

The ETH SLP is viewable here:

There is a pending loan in the pipe for approval, and a PayDay Alternative Loan (PAL) opportunity available with a credit union partner.

In order to diversify and preserve liquidity for DAO lending operations, it is proposed:

At a date TBD (Loan issuance?) the BSLDAO SLP Funds shall be allocated as follows:

Upon funding of the regular Loan, 50% of the remaining ETH funds will be converted to USDC(hts), and moved into the DAO Hedera Multisig Wallet.

Further, 50% of the pooled HBAR will be offramped and provided as liquidity to fund PAL loans through the credit union partner, with the details of that arrangement to be outlined separately, and 25% of the HBAR will be converted to USDC(hts).

This will result in 25% of the ETH (after loan disbursement) and HBAR values remaining exposed to market volatility as we head into the future cycle.

Additionally,

The future SLP, until amended, will, upon reaching $250,000 be converted as follows, each time:

$100,000 to USDC(hts), and $50,000 offramped to PAL funding.

Leaving $100,000 in the pool as native HBAR.

1 Like
2

This looks pretty good. Thanks for the efforts that went into this. The biggest questions I have is does it scale and have flexibility built in as we grow and bring more opportunities to the DAO. Think through all possible scenarios and make sure it can adapt to it.
A few questions:
1.) What happens if the SLP grows much faster, we get more opportunities for PAL or other loan mechanisms. Will this work still. Is the money in USDC only going to be used for other loans outside of PAL - were are we investing this. If PAL picks up - maybe more CU want to do, how easy will this be to adjust and does it if have the flexibile to adapt quickily without having to go back to voting or a process that takes months.
2.) Idle money - we need to have this making money as well. a.) Are we staking USDC - most staking mechanisms we can earn 4% on. b.) Are we staking ETH. - Not sure if Banksocial will offer staking in future for these assets or why we are not using rUSD. If Banksocial doesn’t off then we should move to a safe place that we can stake. If we are not going to stake - why are we not just moving to traditionalFi and making money in a CU high yield or short term CDs. I am also not against even using Coinbase (I know they are not self-custody but their security can be implemented pretty good and they are too big at this point I don’t see them failing. If things look different we can move.

1 Like
3

The way its written it scales with the SLP and preserves funds by removing the exposure to volatility.

I intentionally left the USDC staking or otherwise out of this as that is something we would want to discuss more thoroughly down the road and weigh all of our options on. If you know of some specifics its definitely something worth discussing. While we would be removing volatility, it would definitely be good to put that money to work as well. Until we have more specific other options, from what Ive been told, the PAL opportunity would potentially be able to take all we want to push in that direction. We could vote later to push a larger portion of the USDC over to that if things are going well.

The beauty of all this is whenever we want to change it we simply push up another proposal. But for now, this will help preserve the SLP funds we have so we don’t round trip another cycle.

2 Likes
4

I like the prop, I would prefer to see us use Rivia vs USDC. Keep it CU oriented.

1 Like
5

Interesting thought… would want to ensure that there is liquid and a properly trading rUSD/USDC pair first… IMO

1 Like
6

Out of curiosity, why is that? I prefer rUSD because of the 1-1 backing, seems like a safer stable-coin to use.

7

John would be able to speak to it more. I remember him bringing it up but dont recall the details.

Moving this to a temp check next week!

1 Like