6 months ago I covered $OHM before the project officially launched. Investment of 570$ into Initial Discord Offering would be worth more than $1.5M now if staked all the time... Absolutely incredible.
Today I want to share a project which gives me similar vibes. Meet $TEMPLE.
1) I must admit I had seen $TEMPLE being mentioned here and there many times but I was reluctant to research "another $OHM fork" as it was pitched to me. However, when I finally invested my time to go through Medium articles and Discord I understood it was a premature assessment.
2) First and foremost, I don't think @TempleDAO is a competitor to @OlympusDAO. $TEMPLE definitely borrows some ideas from $OHM but innovates on them to create a new set of products with a different objective.
3) The purpose of @TempleDAO is not to create an algorithmic currency but to build a safe place to shelter investors from market volatility. $TEMPLE is just the first product - it's the governance token with a design inspired by $OHM but it's not the end game.
4) @TempleDAO's roadmap leaks they want to build the next generation of DeFi investing. Instead of actively managing your portfolio, you will be able to choose an investment pool that fits your risk preference and uses automated trading strategies to grow your portfolio.
5) In other words, a future set of products from @TempleDAO turns it into a community owned, decentralized investment fund which offers sophisticated strategies transparently packed into easy-to-use staking pools.
6) Back to $TEMPLE. This is the first product from @TempleDAO which is also a governance token. Unlike many other "worthless governance tokens" we have seen so far, $TEMPLE has very unique mechanics that protect it from unhealthy volatility while delivering yield to stakers.
7) There are 5 pillars to stabilise the protocol: 1. Rewards Backed by Intrinsic Value 2. Price Premium Ceiling reduces dumps 3. Bonus APY Offer encourages buying 4. Unstaking Queue stops stampedes 5. Temple Defend puts floor on price
Let's shortly explain what they mean.
8) 1. Rewards Backed by Intrinsic Value
Intrinsic Value (IV) represents the backing of $TEMPLE. If there are 50 $TEMPLE tokens and $100 in the treasury, Intrinsic Value is $100/50=$2 per token. It's very similar to Risk Free Value per $OHM and represents an objective floor price.
9) 1. cont.
Many protocols issue new tokens at predetermined rates which dilute the value of each token. $TEMPLE can only be minted when there is a growth in protocol reserves and IV. Therefore, rewards cannot be minted excessively and they don't dilute stakers.
10) 2. Price Premium Ceiling reduces dumps
Users will be able to buy $TEMPLE either from AMM or the protocol itself. The protocol sells $TEMPLE at a fixed multiple of the IV so if price on AMM goes above that level, users will be able to buy from the protocol and sell on AMM.
11) 2. cont.
Price ceiling doesn't limit earning opportunities for $TEMPLE holders. Actually, it's a clever mechanism to redirect buying pressure from the AMM into the protocol. This way Temple grows its reserves which are the source of rewards for stakers.
12) 3. Bonus APY Offer encourages buying
Occasionally TempleDAO will have accumulated some excess rewards which can be used as a special offer to earn higher APY for a limited time. The purpose is to incentivize buying, e.g. during times of lower demand for $TEMPLE.
13) 4. Unstaking Queue stops stampedes
In a time of panic, negative feedback loop may lead to an unnecessary bank run. To prevent that, users who want to unstake $TEMPLE, enter a queue to exit. It reduces volatility and promotes long-term staking.
14) 5. Temple Defend puts floor on price
If the price on the AMM is lower than the floor price, users can buy cheap $TEMPLE on the AMM and sell to the protocol. This would be enough to defend the floor price but @TempleDAO made it even better for its users.
15) 5. cont.
The protocol gives users right but not the obligation to sell. If price goes back up, they can keep holding their $TEMPLE and profit from the gains. If $TEMPLE doesn't go back up, they can proceed with the sale.
16) The 5 pillars of TempleDAO stability create very interesting market dynamics. Intrinsic value, floor price, ceiling price, bonus rewards, unstaking queue - these are all different ways to achieve stable and sustainable growth for $TEMPLE. And this is just the first product...
17) Last but not least, the way how @TempleDAO enters the market and builds the community may be even more important than the product itself. Slow and fair launch, plethora of memes - these are, imo, prerequisites for a success story. Come and join! templedao.medium.com/templedao-fire…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
"EIP-1559 sucks. After it was implemented gas prices skyrocketed!"
This take is propagated a lot and I think this is far from true. Correlation is not causation. I suppose gas prices would be much higher now if we didn't have EIP-1559. How does EIP-1559 save you $ETH? 🧵👇
1) Before EIP-1559 when you submitted a transaction on Ethereum, you had to set up a single gas price. If it was high enough, your transaction was included in a block and you paid exactly what you agreed to pay. In many cases you might have substantially overpaid though. Why?
2) Imagine you need to execute a transaction immediately. You check gas prices on gasnow.org and you see a rapid transaction is at 100 GWEI. But this is just an estimation and may suddenly increase. To secure inclusion in the first block you decide to use 200 GWEI.
Being a liquidity provider for tokens that shoot up in price is a pain. You want to respect the pump but you can't because you are getting rekt by "impermanent" loss. Just look at this LP for $AXS-ETH. Rekt.
It doesn't have to be this way. Check out how! 🧵👇
1) Have you been there?
You buy a token that you think will rally like $AXS or $MATIC. You have conviction and patience to hodl. To earn some "passive income" while waiting, you deposit this token to AMM. The pump finally comes and you realize you got rekt by impermanent loss...
2) The above story describes the experience of many novice liquidity providers (LPs). The promise of easy "passive income" in the form of liquidity mining (LM) rewards or AMM trading fees encouraged LPs to match their token with ETH or a stablecoin and deposit them into an AMM.
EIP-1559 is scheduled to go live this week and I still see a lot of wrong takes on its impact. Remember:
- It doesn't make $ETH deflationary by default.
- It doesn't reduce $ETH supply by 90%, referred as "triple halving".
- It's still very bullish for $ETH.
Why? 🧵👇
1) EIP-1559 is one of the most important upgrades in Ethereum's history. Its purpose is to improve user experience on #ETH by changing how transaction fees are estimated and how the network reacts to surges in usage.
2) It doesn't lower gas fees in the long run because it's not a scalability improvement. However, it may help users not overpay for transactions due to a better fee estimation process. It also smooths out gas prices between blocks thanks to variable block sizes.
Wow. I wasn't aware of this but it seems I might have contributed to the crypto history by writing the first comprehensive thread on $OHM and @OlympusDAO long before it became trendy :)
Although I covered it in early March before the project launched, the mechanics of staking and bonding are still up to date and the thread is, imo, a pretty good explanatory read on $OHM and @OlympusDAO:
I should probably collect clout on such a tremendous foresight I had with $OHM but the truth is I was lucky to learn about the project early thanks to @Fiskantes.
There is a common misconception that due to concentrated liquidity on Uni v3 liquidity providers (LPs) earn substantially more trading fees. This is what the original v3 announcement suggests but it's not exactly how it works. Let's find out why! 🧵👇
$UNI
TL;DR:
- Concentrated liquidity on Uni v3 increases capital efficiency but not necessarily Fees APR for LPs.
- Fees APR is dependent on the competition between LPs.
- LPs are incentivized to provide liquidity on narrow price ranges which amplifies their risk of impermanent loss.
1) To begin with, a short reminder where the fees for LPs come from.
When traders swap on AMMs they pay a trading fee which is dependent on AMM/pool:
- Uniswap v2: 0.3%
- Sushiswap: 0.3%
- Uniswap v3: 0.05%, 0.3% or 1%
- Bancor: from 0.1% to 1%
Dear users of @zapper_fi,
I hope you are fully aware of the misleading and often unrealistic "ROI" in the "Opportunities" section for Liquidity Pools.
I hope you realise you can still underperform simple "hodling" even with "ROI" of 100%+.
If not, let me explain to you why. 🧵👇
TL;DR:
- "ROI" on @zapper_fi is based on the fees from the last 24hrs & ignores IL which makes it an unreliable approximation of future returns.
- Toolkit from @ApyVision is a must for LPs in IL-exposed pools.
- IL-protected pools from @Bancor are the best place for passive LPs.
1) Before I start, I want to make it clear that this is not a rant on @zapper_fi. It's a great tool and I use it a lot. But I think the Team could do a much better job when it comes to informing users about certain risks which can result in financial loss.