UPDATE: PROPOSAL SUBMITTED FOR VOTE
Continue discussion here: [PIP-17] Re-allocate PICKLE rewards
Our TVL has largely stabilized following the removal of withdrawal fees. Now is an appropriate time to consider whether the allocation of PICKLE rewards could be done more effectively.
There was discussion in a previous thread started by @Dr.Eggplant for an increase in PICKLE rewards to the renBTCCRV Jar (pJar 0b). The rationale was that Pickle Finance could be marketed as the “home for Bitcoiners” to thus substantially increase our TVL.
It is apparent that there is at least some community support for tweaking PICKLE rewards to more heavily favor the BTC pools.
We have considered the opinions expressed in the previous threads as well as in Discord and propose the following two options:
Option #1 - re-allocate 5% of PICKLE/ETH rewards
With this option, we would re-allocate 5% of PICKLE/ETH rewards to other non-Uniswap farms.
An example distribution is as follows:
- 3% to renBTCCRV (5% -> 8%); and
- 2% to to 3poolCRV or DAI (4% -> 6%).
The rationale for such a distribution is that it gives us a chance to attract BTC deposits for increased TVL, as well as earn more fees from incentivizing one of the more profitable Jars.
Option #2 - TEMPORARILY re-allocate 5% of PICKLE/ETH rewards
Liquidity providers may understandably be nervous about potential decreases in rewards.
One option is to perform Option #1 with the additional stipulation that the 5% is returned to the PICKLE/ETH pool after UNI rewards end (which appears will be the case on November 17).
In this manner, the benefits of attracting additional BTC capital can be explored without commiting to any permanent changes.
Miscellaneous considerations re: liquidity
It is helpful to consider how other projects (Harvest being the example here) approach the topic of liquidity:
|% of token in LP||42%||22%|
The above may suggest that PICKLE emissions could be used more productively in profit generating ventures rather than paying for a deep liquidity pool.