Over on our discord channel it’s seems, no one is in favour of a buyback and burn, or distribution of platform revenue.
So maybe we focus on bOMM (boosted OMM). Same as what Balanced is working on implementing.
What’s everyone’s thoughts on this?
Would be similar to this
Really because I’ve been hearing different. What were their reasonings on why they were against it?
Have a read mate.
Appreciate it mate. I’ll check it out.
Hi, I have a general questions to OMM team, as I didn’t figure out how to create a new topic I just join to this one here.
So, my question is why OMM token is melting down so quickly? What is the reason the OMM token lost its value each day and it looks like it’s going to 0 very soon? This is not good at all for all new investors who would like to invest in OMM, but when they see the price is following down so quickly it doesn’t look good. As far as I know, OMM is trading only on Balanced, the OMM staking is raising every day, so why OMM token is going down in price? I am worried as my investment so far is melting down every day.
I hope OMM team is working on this and looking to at least increase the options for OMM to be trading on more platforms or find some other solutions to improve the OMM price factor!?
Sorry not following here. Are you suggesting having staking benefit similar to that of Aave? Aave currently offers 6.2% staking rewards (in Aave) with governance power to vote (Migration and Staking - FAQ). Omm currently offers 64% staking rewards (in OMM) with governance power to vote.
Think this bOMM model can be interesting. BALN token economics enhancement: bBALN - WIP: BIP - Balanced Given Omm can reference Balanced’s implementation of bBALN, easiest implementations would be following similar logic:
Interest rate boost/discount would be tough as they are not directly related with OMM rewards. Overall, I like where this is going!
I think bOMM is the way to go.
Does it make sense to have boosted staking rewards also?
But maybe we can boost OMM tokens rewards for suppliers OR borrowers.
Ok well maybe a boost in OMM rewards for supply/borrow is the best then.
The investors locking up OMM for a boost, are likely to lock up any additional OMM earned.
Yeah, makes sense to give more for those who value it more. Let’s see if this route is technically feasible.
Given Karma’s recent proposal on CPS, it will be interesting if Omm tries to kickstart the process by using a portion of the protocol fee and use OMM from the DAO fund to provide its own LP. This direction means Omm owning its own liquidity instead of renting liquidity from 3rd party, which is considered “expensive” in the industry at the moment.
Currently, there is around $1.6M of OMM liquidity provided by LP providers and they are compensated with 60K OMM tokens daily (~$12K/day, ~$360K/month, ~$4.3M/yr). LP providers is a group that is likely to sell OMM tokens to make up for impermanent loss.
Right now there is around $400K in protocol fee (ICON Tracker) at the ICX price of $1.77. With OMM from the DAO fund, Omm protocol can create ~$800K in liquidity, which will be half of what is currently being provided by LP providers.
By using the protocol fee to own LP, Omm can perhaps lower the emission of OMM towards LP providers (range of 20 - 50%) and will also enable Omm to earn OMM tokens through its own liquidity.
Sounds good as long as we have enough for other use cases should they arise or if we are happy to take some back out of LPs if needed