Five random Digital Asset and #Bitcoin thoughts heading into the weekend
π
1) Actively managed hedge funds and passive indexes built around high allocations to $BTC have a very short shelf-life. Investors now have the knowledge & means to buy $BTC themselves. Very soon, investors will specifically seek out digital asset HF strategies that own $0 in BTC.
2) Decentralized governance is less about ideology or risk transfer, & more about capitalism. Historically, there has been nothing in digital assets worth governing, but now, as #DeFi protocols are generating real revenues, there is something worth fighting over.
3) Banks & Broker/Dealers are scrambling right now to "cover #Bitcoin" - meaning research on GBTC, MSTR, Coinbase and DCG IPOs, Hut 8, SQ, GLXY etc
Soon, they'll realize the real opportunity is investment banking fees from underwriting new tokens issued by traditional companies.
4) The skills needed to invest in $BTC (macro/trading) & $ETH (tech) are different than those needed to invest in pass-thru tokens & asset-backed tokens (research/modeling).
A tech background is becoming less important than a finance background, especially pertaining to #DeFi
5) Every company with a retail customer model will issue a token within 3-5 years.
2017 tokens were about fundraising a dream
2020+ tokens are about aligning incentives amongst stakeholders (founders, devs, customers), & tokens are the best instrument for fostering growth.
β’ β’ β’
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Facts: 4 Uniswap pools had more liquidity than needed to facilitate trading, & the excess liquidity left once $UNI farming ended. This doesn't affect volumes. TVL is pointless for Uniswap when there is more capital than needed.π
Uniswap's TVL started going up at the end of August, & has now "crashed" back down to where it was 3 months ago.
But Uniswap's volumes peaked BEFORE TVL even increased, & volumes went down while TVL went up.
Volumes & TVL are not correlated when there is excess capital.
Yes, LPs are critical to Uniswap's success, but go look at CoinFlex if you think incentivizing market makers is the secret to success (hint, it isn't). You need customers too, and Uniswap's customers are much stickier than the LPs.
The rationale for owning $ETH as an investment is that Ethereum is a clear market leader, w/ strong growth/usage, & tangible fee generation even though none of this value accrues to ETH token holders yet.
This is actually the same bull case for $UNI π
Uniswap is the clear market leader in DEX trading. Like "ETH vs smart contract protocols", there's not even a close second to $UNI in DEX Trading (courtesy of @DuneAnalytics)
With $ETH, EIP-1559 & ETH 2.0 are constantly in "the future", but the $UNI "Fee Switch" is happening w/ near certainty Feb 16, 2021 (180 days after governance began).
$UNI will then join a small list of tokens like $HXRO $MKR $FTT $BNB that accrue real value from earnings
2) @koeppelmann & @gnosisPM still have not released a formal plan for community review on updated tokenomics, or on the Gnosis DAO that they teased. They stated in their discord that this was going to be released on Sept 9th. This is starting to feel like more empty promises.
3) It is increasingly clear that the community is begging for a plan, whether that be a rebuttal to ours or a new token economic structure altogether. We encourage Gnosis to do right by tokenholders and take this responsibility seriously.
Tons of great content from the @arca team today, crossing a variety of topics including:
1) , and - a great week for digital assets 2) the melding of CeFi & #DeFi 3) Fighting for tokenholder rights 4) Is a security? (answer, no)
Thread π with all 4 pieces
In this week's "That's Our Two Satoshis", we discuss why the offering from @UniswapProtocol was so groundbreaking, & how can be valued as a sum-of-the-parts between "utility" & "security". We also discuss and its price bifurcation.
To all token holders. @arca submitted a proposal in June that benefits ALL token holders. We presented facts & details. We are now awaiting an actual response by .@gnosisPM & .@koeppelmann.
Thus far, Gnosis has simply provided more unsubstantiated promises.
Thread π
For those unfamiliar, the value of & USD in Gnosis' Treasury is worth $70 million, which would give every holder $153/token (currently trading at $58). This means Gnosis is destroying value for its tokenholders.
Gnosis had 3+ months since we first engaged them, yet below is their only response. We demand a formal response to our claims that includes a detailed, forward looking plan.
π is NOT a plan. This is a 2018 blog post attempting to justify past actions.
24/ @davidiach Gnosis borrowed $12.5mm to build a prediction market, which has finally come to market 3+ years later. Trading ICO's, making VC investments, & yield farming are well outside industry best practices & not what token holders expect.
25/ No different than a stock buyback @harrycanuck. If Gnosis believes that they can produce a strong token model they should be thrilled to tender at NAV. This also signals to the community that they plan to create real value flow for token holders.