With week 2 Badger emissions coming to an end tomorrow December 17th at 1pm EST, we need to decide if the emissions should change for week 3. With that we will also launch 2 additional vaults during this period.
Details
Week 2 emissions were as follows;
Total $BADGER 603,750
Setts
renbtcCRV — 85,937 $BADGER = 15,959.7286 day 1 and days 2-7 11,662.8786/day
sbtcCRV — 85,937 $BADGER = 15,959.7286 day 1 and days 2-7 11,662.8786/day
tbtcCRV — 85,937 $BADGER = 15,959.7286 day 1 and days 2-7 11,662.8786/day
Badger — 110,000 $BADGER = 20,428.5714 day 1 and days 2-7 14,928.5714/day
Badger <>wBTC Uniswap LP — 150,000 $BADGER = = 27,857.1428 day 1 and days 2-7 20,357.1429/day
Super Sett
Harvest renbtc CRV —85,937 $BADGER = 15,959.7286 day 1 and days 2-7 11,662.8786/day
With 2 additional vaults we will see the APY on vaults slightly fall with these emissions. Right at the end of week 3 we will introduce DIGG rewards for these vaults which should give it a boost.
For that reason I believe we maintain the same total emissions as week 2 but exclude the APY boost on day 1. We incentivize the 2 new vaults with some of the higher emissions to attract TVL while slightly reducing all other vaults. With the 2 new vaults launching mostly likely mid way through week 3 I have reduced accordingly. This way the amount per day is similar to our highest APY vaults.
With 8-% of our TVL in the 4 CRV vaults I propose we barely reduce those.
Upon further analysis we didn’t see much of a boost in TVL or # of deposits with the boost applied day 1 of week 2.
I propose for week 3 emissions;
Total $BADGER 603,750
Setts
renbtcCRV — 83,437.5 $BADGER
sbtcCRV — 83,437.5 $BADGER
tbtcCRV — 83,437.5 $BADGER
Badger — 70,000 $BADGER
(NEW) wBTC/ETH Sushiswap LP — 40,000 $BADGER
Badger <>wBTC Uniswap LP — 110,000 $BADGER
(NEW) Badger <>wBTC Sushiswap LP— 50,000 $BADGER
Super Sett
Harvest renbtc CRV —83,437.5 $BADGER
Implementation
If you are in support of this proposal to maintain the emission schedule vote “Yes”; if you don’t support maintaining emissions vote “No.”
All voting will end by 11am EST December 17th to give the operations team enough time to implement for week 3.
After emission #1 and #2 I think its better to distribute the same amount for all weekdays instead of rewarding day 1 which can lead to withdrawing funds.
I dont think so. It’s a vault strategy, so it will automatically harvest and sell sushi to deposit more into the LP. essentially you should have more SLP tokens after you unstake, which should translate to more wbtc and eth.
@Spadaboom What is the motivation for distributing $BADGER to Sushiswap LPs ?
Wouldn’t it be better to focus on Uniswap (aka one DEX) for the BADGER-WBTC pair so that the liquidity is as deep as possible there ? Otherwise when spreading across DEXs, people will end up needing to use aggregators like 1inch (for reduced slippage) which results in higher tx fees.
A bit concerned with the steep drops on the current Badger and Badger wBTC setts as they represent a 36 and 26% respective drop. Selfishly that hits pretty hard but DIGG as you mentioned should take some of the edge off. More concerned about how others feel and will react as I won’t react adversely, perhaps move to the Sushi LPs. Willing to give it a go as is although I would like the drop in the Badger only LP to not be as steep and perhaps brought down to only 90k at most while dropping the Badger wBTC Uni LP to 90K. The rationale being any Lp providers currently in the wBTC pool would possibly move to the Sushi options more readily to absorb folks searching for a higher APY. Badger have nowhere else to go and may decide to sell or possibly LP. Nonetheless, I voted yes since perhaps the multiplier will keep many in place.
Also, will the Sushi LPs have the geyser multiplier?
What’s the rational for not also reducing the rewards for the less risky btc pools (which already get 56% of the rewards pool) to decrease the impact on badger / uni LP apy? Why not decrease all pools by 15% to get that extra 90k badger. This seems more fair as everyone benefits from a new product. Less drastic and fair changes in APY should be encouraged for stability and assurances going forward that one pool wont have all its rewards suddenly decreased enough to warrant changing your position.
You mention some of this might be recouped from digg rewards, but those are not finalized yet, are those going to be favoring these pools?
I think the wbtc/eth pool rewards should be reduced in favor of the new wbtc/badger pool. wbtc/weth has different risk almost entirely outside the badger ecosystem. I would rather see a uni badger/eth pool - which has an actual liquidity problem.
The only worry about the entire $BADGER project I have is the cliffedge at the end of the 8/10 weeks. We don’t want to be like $SWRV ($1bn locked…then to almost nothing with sudden end of generous emissions).
We need to smooth that transition. Perhaps after week 4 we start slow decline on emissions so that emissions can continue for at least another 6 months-1 year to give time to full products to be developed, each subsidized by $BADGER. Perhaps we can we play with the 21,000,000 number to work this out.
