I use OolongSwap and have skin in the game. As someone that has been around the game a while, after a certain point you realize that there is not one DeX to rule them all or one CeX to rule them all. Not to mention the fact that OolongSwap is not a Boba project just a partner since they are an anon team or that is what their discord faq said at one point. So it is not a Boba Dex.
We need a team that embraces the “How are we going to make it” mentality and I think PCV DeX is part of that future… across several chains with all roads leading back to Boba as the staking hub and frictionless interface with said chains. I am experienced enough to know that wagmi is a false narrative since 85% of the folks in this game get crushed in bear markets. Of course, ideas like this are not relevant to the proposal.
BOBA is pretty early-stage ecosystem. I believe latter is more suitable for early stage-ecosystem, for decentralization. Believe we could burn token later, like matic & BNB did.
Just saw a recent tweet from the Boba team showing xBOBA, i.e. hinting at staking. If this is coming soon maybe we should wait to see what the proposal is before any buyback proposal, as it could affect staking getting network fees.
It was mentioned on discord that the 5% staking was being funded by the treasury, and that the buyback proposal was a separate thing. I’m still in favor of having a buyback program for now and locking them up in a DAO controlled wallet.
Hi All, I submitted the proposal for the Boba Buyback program that Leslie outlined. Voting starts January 1, 2022 4:18PM PST in the Boba Gateway under the DAO tab.
If the proposal passes, I think there should be finer detail for transparency sake on how the buyback will occur to be determined by the team (i.e. buyback occurs every Monday, on FTX or Oolongswap and sent to a known address).
Just to be clear, this is just for the buyback. The tokens will be locked up in a DAO-controlled wallet until it can be determined later by the DAO on how to use these funds (i.e. burn, back to treasury, developer fund, liquidity incentives, etc.)
Here is a typical reason for a buy-back for those that are not sure why it is done. A buy-back on $BOBA creates demand on the exchanges. Increased demand pushes price higher, and a higher price makes $BOBA more valuable. With a more valuable $BOBA, the DAO can expand operations by hiring more developers, marketers, etc. A higher $BOBA price is net positive for the community.
Its a buyback and wait to see what to do with it cause there doesn’t seem be a consensus for the latter part - id much rather have the buyback occur as soon as possible without the second part holding up the proposal - feel free to propose a separate burn program
In my view this doesn’t really have much of an effect, now that there is staking.
Staking is, in a nut shell:
Lock tokens
Receive gains of the network. Currently the 5% is both from treasury and from ETH fees
Hence, this buyback doesn’t fundamentally change the tokenomics of the BOBA float. I had orignally proposed this idea because staking wasn’t out yet. But now staking does the same thing (and more, to reward Boba holder).
Thus I don’t think this is worth doing at this point in time.
I think most people wonder why, with 42% treasury, why are we using folks ETH to buy BOBA, at all. Everyone was told we’d get paid in fees, when staking came around. Objectively speaking, we now being paid with treasury fees to get BOBA when staking and they are buying more BOBA with our fees. It is a bad look is what most of us realize (note, I said this would pass weeks ago, I did not even bother voting against it, not worth the gas fees) since if you look at network inflows and this part is CRUCIAL tokens given to the last team, we potentially have a lot of free sell pressure, assuming they did not already exit… so we are paying the team that did not deliver any value, again… It might not be a real issue but not everyone in crypto is dumb money, most people understand that buyback and hold is a grenade waiting to happen since you are using peoples’ fees right now, to buy and underperforming asset, with no plan what to do with it. You want to hire devs but others might like the BOBA, or the ETH when it is sold, and I’d be totally against hiring more devs with the DAO wallet since it means all the funds that that the team said they needed was not a enough and market would dump like crazy.
I agree, jwboba. A DAO proposal can be created to determine how to use the new funds. I like the idea to create a proposal to burn those coins. I wonder if we will see that soon for a vote. The market does not seem to be reacting to the buyback alone. Perhaps, clarifying the buy-back’s role will change that.
Anyone know why the vote says defeated but all the votes were for it? FOR: 100%
It does not look great if your community offers a DAO vote and gets 100% for it and it does not pass. It might be prudent to explain why it failed to the community. FUD will be high if if it looks like we DAO votes can just be voided.
Requires 1m votes to be approved. However, almost 700k votes for approval which is 100% of the votes. Some people don’t have their boba tokens on L2 and in their wallet or exchange. Personally I think this should be approved. If not, then the DAO is a failure in itself.
It is hard to disagree with this statement since the 1 million votes thing was not present or disclosed on the proposal page or voting page from what I could tell. Maybe, there was a pop screen that said it when a person voted? Hopefully, the team will put that information up on the DAO page, out from the defeated text to explain this for future reference.
Again, I was not a fan of this proposal, but with the vote count being as high as it was I can see folks thinking it is going to pass and being like, “I am not voting/spending gas”. Perhaps, if they knew it had to be 1 million votes they might have voted to get to that number.