Redirect 10% of Emissions from LP to pJars

Short and sweet for once :slight_smile:
Based on ongoing Discord discussions, this proposal seeks to redirect up to 10% of PICKLE emissions from the Power Pool to the PickleJars.
This will take place regardless of the outcome of PIP-17. - PIP-17 passed
Reduction to take place @ 1%/day, exact allocation percentages TBD in RFC/PIP

Proposed process:

  1. 20+ votes on this poll with 75% in favour - Complete
  2. Discord poll - 200+ votes needed with 75% in favour
  3. If 1 and 2 pass, we move to RFC/PIP
  4. Formalize reduction %, schedule and allocation %s to pJars
  5. Snapshot vote
  • Let’s drain some liquidity!
  • Maintain status quo

0 voters

For the rationale behind this proposal, please refer to this post.

1 Like

I voted FOR. Would like to see some of the LP Pickle emissions directed towards stakers in order to drive up staking rewards + I think most would like to continue gaining Pickle if they leave LP for Staking.

2 Likes

I second this, although debated as somewhat ponzinomics I see other projects doing similarly and if we find the right amount (+ continue with wETH rewards) I don’t see a problem. Hopefully we can add this consideration as an option on next PIP voting

I am for the idea of shifting the balance more towards Pickle Staking. I know @Bobbysands articulated the same desire some time ago - I admit at the time I was not bought in but between his post, subsequent discussion and the latest analysis I’m now on board :sunglasses:

I know you have proposed this irrespective of the outcome of PIP17, but I think they are so intertwined we should actually revise the proposal to account for both after the result is known.

My proposal would be:

  • Weekly reduction in LP Pickle Emission (easier for the team and users alike to keep track/make changes
  • 5% per week reduction
    – 1-2% of that directed towards Pickle Stakers
    – 3-4% of that directed towards new jars/strategies or to upweight existing or to put in the rainy day fund.

A weekly shift also allows enough time for voting on the next week’s allocation, plus review of current jar shares. Kinda like how Sushiswap votes on the weekly menu or Curve on their gauge weights.

I worry that if we shock the LP too much with potentially -12% in a week (PIP17 + this 1% daily proposal), the impact may be shocking too.

I have a side proposal off the back of this that I’ll write up later.

7 Likes

Looking forward to reading your proposal! @chimaera

Assuming PIP-17 passes tonight and is implemented tomorrow, we will still have a minimum of 4 days before further reductions take effect. I amended the timelines slightly to be a little more realistic :slight_smile:

I was thinking of an idea to make this a little more fun and engage the community…what if we had a daily discord poll to decide which pool gets boosted the next day (well,2 days including timelock)? It’s just 1%/day and we include the caveats that no single pool can be boosted 2 days in a row and capped at 4% for any single pool.

10 days of polls :smiley:

2 Likes

This is a great initiative backing up your previous thread that analysed the liquidity pool and its depth vs daily volume and the real need for such deep liquidity. I voted ‘FOR’. I am sure there will be tremors just like after PIP-17, which is OK. Anyone long on Pickle will simply stay put and basically weed out short term opportunistic capital. The price will probably get slashed again, but I am sure with the Dev team and the community making the right moves, it will all come back together eventually. @yyctrader still waiting to participate in a Discord poll? When moon poll ser?

1 Like
USDT 2.40%
SUSHI-WBTC 3.17%
WBTC 1.46%
3CRV 4.53%
RENBTC 1.43%
USDC 3.75%
yCRV 2.91%
DAI 2.31%
UNI-USDT 4.66%
WETH 1.64%
UNI-USDC 4.66%
CRVREN 1.37%
TUSD 2.11%
UNI-DAI 4.66%
Liquidity 54.26%
UNI-WBTC 4.66%

I’ll post this on a few of the ongoing threads regarding liquidity and PICKLE allocation.
Above is the allocation (currently) Harvest Finance uses and manages to keep a liquidity pool of around $15MM. They’re paying out 15% less in emissions for liquidity than we are and have a 25% higher staking rate than we currently do.

A reduction of 10% (assuming PIP-17 passes) will bring us to the same 55% liquidity emissions as harvest.

3 Likes

@jintao Fantastic analysis!
This is further evidence that we have far too much liquidity…55% is a great initial target for us.
We should stay the course and keep cutting till we reach a balance.

Consulted @Larry_Cucumber and learned that 1% daily would be too cumbersome due to timelocks + multisig.

So, I suggest we do a Discord poll for a 10% reduction…and fine-tune the schedule/allocation in the PIP if the vote passes.

I am big time in favour of this change, and think this might be the most important PIP to date.

2 Likes

Hopefully very soon. Text is ready :slight_smile:
Waiting for the dust to settle after PIP-17 is implemented tomorrow.

You caught on to this a long time ago…wish I had paid more attention :man_facepalming:

Moving from 70% to 55% frees up 4118 PICKLEs/week (currently worth $82K/week) to be allocated to the pJars.
While the protocol currently earns nothing from these PICKLEs, we could potentially be getting 50% of that value back in fees if we allocate it to pDAI and renBTC.

2 Likes

Would it not be possible to allocate part of these emissions to the stakers directly? or allocate a share of the emissions from the UNI jars when / if they stop?
Pickles would be distributed proportionately among stackers, increasing their bag…
Some LPs could therefore prefer to stake, which would reduce liquidity and stakers would gain on several fronts (excess cash +% emissions)

I may be straying from the subject, and that may not make sense.

I admit being a little surprised by such a drastic drop in the share allocated to LPs, and this so close to a controversial decrease (in votes).
I’m about 50/50 LP and staker.
If the rewards for LPs halve and volatility increases as much, I might be tempted to take it all out and look for a more stable platform, or just farm stablecoins only (less return but more long-term security. ).

It is not a threat but simple resentment.

In short, there are too many issues and too many close deadlines to be able to assess this proposal. Which prompts me to vote against for now.

Not that I want to maintain some stability in the price of Pickles, I’m also worried that this will all turn into a simple competition for returns with Harvest as the only opponent.
Harvest did this, Harvest is better at that, we are better than Harvest doing this … blah blah
I don’t use Harvest, and I haven’t come to Pickle to make it look like Harvest.
I came for the community, the innovation and for the higher APYs, which for me Harvest does not have.

No hard feelings ^^

4 Likes

Never! You made my avatar :slight_smile:
Completely understand your concerns that we may be moving too quickly.
To clarify, it would take at least 7-10 days before any further changes could be implemented.

Regarding emissions for stakers, everything is open for discussion. While it doesn’t generate fees, it could be a way to smooth the transition and incentivize people to move over to staking.

Currently just looking to get a Discord poll going so we can get a sense of what the overall community wants. It’s just 20-30 of us in the forum after all. If the poll fails, we shelve this idea and go back to the drawing board.

3 Likes

Here’s the Discord poll text I’ve been playing around with…thoughts/suggestions?

A community proposal has obtained the necessary support in the governance forum to merit the consideration of the broader PICKLE community.

The proposal seeks to reallocate 10% of PICKLE emissions in a phased manner from the Pickle/ETH pool to the PickleJars in pursuit of higher TVL and profits. Consequent to the passage of PIP-17, this would reduce the PICKLE/ETH pool’s share of emissions to 55%.

See details here: (link to this poll here)

Please note that this is only a preliminary vote to gauge support, and no action will be taken until the proposal is formalized in a PIP and a formal vote is taken. The timeline and target allocations will be open for debate prior to finalizing the PIP.

Should we reallocate 10% of PICKLE Emissions from the PICKLE/ETH Pool?

Y/N

We will consider a result of 75% in favour as confirmation to initiate a formal discussion.

This poll will be open for 48 hours until XXXX UTC

Potential follow up questions to make the poll more granular (looking at you @dafacto :slight_smile: ):

Where should the PICKLE emissions be allocated?

A – 100% to the PickleJars

B – Some to Staking, Balance to the PickleJars

How quickly should we proceed?

1 – 3.33% every 3 days (total 7 days)

2 – 5% weekly (total 14 days)

3 – 10% one-off reduction (total 2 days)

2 Likes

This looks good @yyctrader . I think we should let this on into the wild. I am really curious to see the impact and participation level of Discord voting v/s snapshot voting. Would be also interesting to see how the vote participation and levels change between the Discord and Snapshot due to only LPs being allowed to vote.

1 Like

Y B 2

I actually think 5% weekly for 3 weeks to take the emission down to 50% would be optimal, but either way this will be a tough one to get past @Tomato_Juxx and his LP pals.

1 Like

Just be mindful that the redirected Pickle Emissions must be directed towards the most productive TVL. Overincentivizing pools with shitall emissions could actually be worse than the status quo.

Logic is, LP holders are less likely to dump 100% of their farmed Pickles, because they’ll be dumping on themselves.

Depositors on the other hand, have no skin in the game, if you spray these pickles to them, you should assume 100% of them will be market sold. We have to make sure the allocation is such that even in the scenario where they will sell 100% of the emissions, the net effect is still a benefit to Pickle holders.

3 Likes

@yyctrader thanks for taking the time on this, great work as always!

Should we reallocate 10% of PICKLE Emissions from the PICKLE/ETH Pool?

  • Yes, but we should to do this delicately, to not drive users who are 100% LP away from the platform. (I am not 100%LP btw, but trying to consider all users as they will vote too)

Where should the PICKLE emissions be allocated?

  • It is hard to determine until we have the results of the post UNI allocations. Will circle back.
  • I would like to see 5% go to staking. More allocations to staking incentivizes holding, which should drive the pickle price up.

How quickly should we proceed?

  • Between option 2 or 3. I like option 2 a little more, but would prob suck with multisig. Kind of between rip the bandaid off, or give the LP’s some time to absorb the drops.
1 Like

As I mentioned n discord… I blive this preposal is detrimental to pickle.finance as you are constantly decreasing from the most important pool in the pickle eco system!
The jars are fine all profitable already and the tvl shows it… But tvl doesn’t help pickle or pickle holders by giving jars more emissions we just increase sell pressure on uniswap and the price will keep falling!
Uni lp providers put 22 mil in liquidity and the price has fallen since then 60% the lp providers have probably lost the most…
Now reajusting more emissions from them will chase them away!
Without our pickle liquidity this project will no longer have such high tvl… No point in harvesting pickle if you can’t sell it…

I would like to ask you guys which jar, pool, stake is the most important for pickle in the future…

My opinion is the uni pickle/eth farm.and if we keep decreasing it we won’t ever have a truly successful project.

2 Likes

Instead of decreasing emissions for our liquidity providers., we should rather be taking a percentage of jar profit to buy pickle out of uniswap and either give them to our uni liquidity providers or burn them!

I Agee with Vapur when he said…
‘Depositors on the other hand, have no skin in the game, if you spray these pickles to them, you should assume 100% of them will be market sold’

3 Likes