Why keep it together? It seems most of the community is in favor of all of the other aspects of the proposal. Whereas the merger is the only thing that people seem interested in discussion / alternatives.
The reason I see to break out the merger in a separate proposal is to avoid having the other changes delayed if the merger merits more discussion. Do you disagree?
This is my first post here, and I want to be transparent: I currently only hold veFXS, not FPIS.
In terms of the overall vision, Iâm optimistic and bullish about the entire ecosystem AKA nation.
Regarding the FPIS merger, while I see potential, one crucial aspect seems missing: a clear plan to prevent further dilution or a strategy for managing the increasing circulating supply over time. The marketâs reaction to this proposal indicates that FPIS holders may benefit more than FXS holders. Personally, I had hoped for a more detailed strategy, and Iâm somewhat disappointed with how the situation has been handled thus far. The launch of Fraxtal seems to have been overshadowed by the drama surrounding FPIS. I believe itâs crucial to expedite the voting process and move forward.
Thanks for all your calcs. I love the thought that has gone behind all your proposals, and Iâm liking the updated proposal (noting that I need a bit more time to think about it and work through the math). Regarding this calculation on the final state of FXS, how did you come to the conclusion that the supply of FXS would increase from 100M to 140M?
From the proposal, see the below line:
âThe conversion of FPIS on the unlock date of March 22, 2028 will be at 2.5 FPIS to 1 FXS if not relockedâ
Iâm not sure if Iâm doing something wrong but, how I interpret that is that the 40M of FPIS would result in 16M of FXS on unlock in Mar-28. This means that final state FXS would be closer to 116M (excluding any burns that have occurred) and the diluted price would be higher (based on todayâs price). Am I thinking about this incorrectly?
The 16M is the correct number after the revised proposal today. Keep in mind there is over 16M FXS idle in the community governed treasury, this is highlighted in the revised proposal. Meaning that even if 100% of FPIS lockers did not relock in 2028 (an unlikely scenario since Convex itself permalocks), then the total supply of FXS would still not ever go above 100M as a result of this proposal. This final proposal essentially distributes part of the idle FXS in the community treasury after 4 years as if it was the total supply of the FPIS token all along. The total supply of FXS would not go over 100M and no new inflation would occur in this revised proposal. This doesnât take into account the FXS that will be bought back over 4 years in this proposal which will likely take the supply of FXS down below 100M even. Overall, FXS will likely deflationary and will soon have a fee switch/rev share to veFXS stakers in this final roadmap with a strong adherence to the original 100M supply cap.
Can you explain the mechanics of using any frax asset as a gas? Does any token go through FLE and swapped to frxETH and then used as eth in sequencer? Am I wrong?
Thanks Sam K, the proposal looks great in its new form. Looking forward to voting it through!
Sounds great. LFG. We are ready for the Snapshot, letâs not delay this vote so we can move fast enough.
Appreciate the revised proposal.
16 million FXS * $8 (assume zero growth in $fxs price) = $128,000,000 in 4 years
Thats what FXS holders pay to bring FPIS back into the fold.
FPIS will only contribute ~$5 million in assets in FXS holders in exchange.
Thereâs no need to discount this $128 million to its present value as FPIS lockers will also earn veFXS yield until the 4 years is up.
Although we are still wildly over paying to bring FPIS back into the fold, this revised proposal satisfies all sides in some way because at least there is no increase to maximum supply.
Everybody knows if you increase max supply once youâll do it again and again so its a good line to draw in the sand and I appreciate you guys doing that because the temptation to increase supply is very strong.
Deflationary token supply + activated fee switch is a huge narrative boost.
This proposal is up for voting here: Snapshot
I agree with your point of view and the same objection to westwoodâs point of view. FPIS voting rights can remain unchanged. FPIS uses less than 10% of its interests to poach 50% of FXSâs interests. This is unfair. It is recommended to set the unlocked exchange ratio to 4 FPIS : 1 FXS Or there should be separate voting options for everyone to vote