FIP 28 veFXS enhanced rewards

As a protocol we need to look at ways to increase the usefulness / demand of veFXS tokens so i have started this thread so people can share their ideas on how we can do this with the idea of putting up a proposal once a few good ideas have been discussed.

I would like to propose the idea of rewarding locked veFXS holders with extra rewards once the FRAX market cap reaches set target.

When the USDC- FRAX pair was added to the gauge we voted for some of the rewards that where issued to the USDC-FRAX v2 stakers to be re-directed to the protocols treasury, so i propose some of these funds are used to pay for these extra target based rewards.

i propose that at each level we reward the veFXS holder with 5-10% of the treasury FXS holdings.

$5b ( final reward)

the rewards should be paid out over a 3 month time frame and only paid to locked veFXS holders.

this will result in veFXS holders having the same risk as before, but will now have more rewards if the FRAX protocol grows to become a much bigger project. so from an investors point of view veFXS will have a better risk / reward (imo).

i should disclose that i am a veFXS holder but it is only around 4.5% of my total investment in the FRAX protocol.

1 Like

i had another idea …

right now the AMO’s make profit and use 25% of the profit to buy FXS on the open market to reward veFXS holders.

what if we change it so it uses 25% to buy FXS from the treasury (at current market price) rather then the open market?

this would mean the treasury now has more (non-FXS) funds to use in its profit making operations and it would help these funds compound and make bigger profits over time.

the down side would be slightly less buying on the open market.

the up side would be more funds for the protocol to use in its profit making operations.

First of all, this is a great thread to get ideas going. It seems similar to my veFXS perks/features thread but I guess we can have two threads to discuss it.

I am intrigued by your idea of buying FXS from the treasury with the AMO profits. It sounds like it is in effect just another way of holding profits on the balance sheet but in a more elegant manner. I would back this idea since it keeps value in the protocol overall. If you intended it in a different way, then I might have misunderstood.