Reason for proposal is To restructure minswaps tokenomics, adjust emmissions to reduce severe inflation of token supply while adding various coin burn mechanisms as a result of more competition in cardano DEX space as investors and liquidity providers will drift to the DEX that has the more valuable token in a BULL market.
**I acknowledge Minswaps designed its tokenomics the way it is to attract liquidity to the DEX and I must say it worked like magic, we are currently the DEX with the highest TVL on the cardano block chain. Investors were attracted to the high yield since the inception of minswap.
Now that we have accomplished biggest TVL on the block I believe it’s time to severely reduce MINSWAPS token supply, hear me out.
Investors were attracted to the yield however if this yield continues to be DEBASED and hold no value, we will lose the very thing we strives to earn in the first place, with projects like AXO, VYFI & GENS launching soon, more and more investors will move their liquidity to those DEXS if our token continues to be worthless as a result of severe inflation. The competition will suck up all of our liquidity, make no mistake this will happen, AXO has only 30 million coins and a unique DEX, liquidity providers on MINSWAP will quicky move their liquidity over to AXO when they launch and they plan to launch soon, they will move their liquidity to earn scarce high value token over $MIN that never gains value because of continued HEAVY debasement to the tune of 690,000 new tokens a day.
I can create another proposal to state the amount of token the community thinks is ideal but personally i’m thinking a total of 1 billion total supply tokens like UNISWAP Ethereums NO. DEX or 1.5 billion tokens and reduce emissions so the approximate 700 million tokens remaining could be used for yield farming for 3-7 years if we incorporate a mechanizing like the Bitcoin halving instead of 5 billion.
Community please vote to approve this proposal for the sustainability of our position as NO. 1 DEX On cardano.2023-05-22T04:00:00Z→2023-05-28T04:00:00Z
Tokenomics are about thinking long term, like a 20 or 25 YEAR horizon. This is short term thinking. Also, if you cut the total supply, it really only has a psychological effect. For example , you would also have to immediately cut the emissions. So instead of giving out 10 MIN worth 0.1 ada each we now give out 5 MIN worth 0.2 ada each. In fact, the only truly fair way to do it would be to issue a new token and and have all currwnt holders redeem their current MIN at the new rate, i.e. send in 5 MIN and get 1 NewMIN back.
Saying “let’s dramatically change the tokenomics which have been public for well over a year.” Is a short-sighted move to pump the bags of current MIN holders. Respectable businesses simply don’t make such massive changes that materially impact their investors.
I agree with the part about needing to adjust emissions, but it needs to be based on DEX revenue.
The overall tone of this proposal is to attempt to drive scarcity through token burns, reduced supply, and reducing emissions. This won’t actually cause the DEX to become more valuable, just increase the value of individual tokens. Therefore, I think this proposal is bad. We need to create proposals that drive DEX value, not mess with tokenomics to increase individual coin value.
You know, it is always possible for any individual to burn tokens. Just buy tokens and send them to a dead address. You can create the scarcity you want to see in the world.
Not gonna lie, the part of me that invested almost 2 years of an IT job salary wants to say yes, but for the greater good I must say no. There has to be a better solution. Like you said, the emissions work wonders in terms of bringing liquidity. Deep within I know that during a bull market the peice will go up regardless. The moon part of me wants this, but the logical and long term approach side of me knows there has to be a better solution. This proposal is a start. There are some good points here. Perhaps we can work on it to come to a solution that won’t sacrafice long term growth and liquidity provision for short term gains. Btw much respect for you Legolas
Do you have any examples of where the situation you describe has played out? I would like to see some supporting evidence of a similar situation, as well as events where these mechanisms have resulted in the positive effects you intimate. We should be exceedingly careful about doing anything truly unmalleable.
With as little distribution as there currently is, and as early as this is right now (only live inside a bear market), artificial supply reduction would restrict the protocol in the long run, before we even have the chance to experience a bull market and ensure the token distributions strike a viable balance for both bull and bear. It could permanently hamper the ability to pivot rewards in the future and restrict the overall liquidity of the protocol’s funds.
I am for continuing measured reassessment of the rewards structure, but argue that supply reduction is unnecessary and likely injurious to the health of the DEX long-term. I would believe this to be especially true for action with no precedent knowledge of competitive incentive structures, nor any live market data. We should be flexible and adjust dynamically, fully informed, rather than cornering ourselves by jumping at the shadows of a perceived threat.
I think increasing ADA-MIN PoL is way better than burning because more and more liquidity will bring more and more volume. This will also absorb any emissions better over time. Minswaps incentive structure (plus overall awesomeness) has indeed worked wonders so far and has allowed Minswap to grab most liquidity and and volume. And don’t forget that the TVL dominance brings more ADA staking rewards to in turn attract TVL.
Thanks for your precious proposal to make Minswap much better.
I want to share my opinion regarding with your proposal!
If we burn the tokens then we have to reduce the daily emission of min tokens.
This means that yield farming is not attractive anymore in short term. We are in just intial stage of decentralized finance. Token value will be decided by the utilityof tokens and how dex is working well to users.
What meaning burning tokens bring to us just burning? We have to keep focusing on the making dex more stable and functional with finding the way of broadening token utility.
It’s stupid for people to say just add more coins. I like the idea of the proposal and I don’t care what other cry babies think about it at the end we ALL end up winning if you have been accumulating some $MIN…
We cannot continue to use min as exit liquidity only or holders will leave. Min needs to go up in value or it is not worth holding. Saw a major whale leave last week total exit. Millions of min dumped. We need to provide value for investors so that min can thrive Min value should be based being the best dex not dumping millions of min on hodlrs. Let’s go min! We got this.
Token burning simply doesn’t add value to the Dex. It won’t affect the emissions either. It’s just a way of artificially creating scarcity and negatively affects new investors. This does the exact opposite of creating a healthy investing environment.
