There have been some scattered mentions of this article by placeholder vc. It would be good to have some focused discussion. The central idea is that instead of buyback-and-burn you can buyback-and-[something], and this can add more value long-term than destroying the tokens.
The [something] can be broken down like this:
- Put funds in a treasury
Where can eventually be a full-fledged smart treasury that supports token price, funds development, generates more returns… basically lots of awesomeness. But the space has not been explored much so it makes sense to start slowly until we better understand the options.
As a relatively low-complexity first step may I suggest one of the following two options:
(a) buyback-and-save : put the tokens in a multi-sig wallet and decide later what to do with them. This is a low-risk, low complexity move to stop burning tokens and keep all options open.
(b) buyback-and-uniswap : A bit more complex but with benefits for the ecosystem: put the bought-back tokens in the Uniswap PICKLE-ETH pool to support PICKLE liquidity. Extra liquidity is a good thing because it stabilizes the token price. Treasury funds would also generate returns from trading fees. Remember: Long-term, PICKLE emissions drop and therefore so do the incentives to provide liquidity to the the PICKLE-ETH pool. In order to maintain a healthy ecosystem, PICKLE needs to be liquid, and liquidity needs to come from somewhere. In the long run, balancer seems to be a better option for this smart treasury (as per the article) but uniswap seems like a good first step.