Decision to move incentives from the normal Curve pool to the boosted Curve pool

Good day Defrosters and welcome to the very first discussion on the Defrost forum!

We will discuss this topic for the next week and then pass it on to voting. The first topic will be on whether to move the incentives from the normal Curve pool to the boosted Curve pool.

We would love to hear your thoughts and ideas!

4 Likes

Let’s get this conversation started, DeFrosters

1 Like

I like this idea. Boosting incentivizes staking of MELT and holding SMELT in the boosting contract… We should reward those who choose to stake and hold SMELT over those who don’t.

2 Likes

Yes, this move makes staker feel better in supported by Defrost finance. Also, for many people who have already invested in a normal curve and are unaware of the benefits of a boosted curve, seeing a new reward may increase investment.

2 Likes

I think the MELT emissions and incentives should be moved entirely to the Boost Curve Farm.

My reasoning behind this is that I believe the team has already made several adjustments to emissions, inflation, and added incentives for MELT/sMELT holders/stakers which has helped tremendously with the sell pressure on MELT while simultaneously rewarding MELT investors.

Moving the emissions from the original farm to the boost farm will further support these goals while also rewarding larger addresses by creating a higher potential APR (using sMELT) than currently available in the original farm.

4 Likes

I’m in favor of making a single boosted Curve pool. Currently, it seems there is approx. 2x overall MELT base rewards in the non-boosted one compared to the boosted one and the market is pretty much in equilibrium. Merging these thus should not lower the current boosted Curve pool base reward APR and the final base APR should remain pretty much the same which means the current non-boosted pool can still not boost and keep their APR. The demand for MELT should increase and the overall MELT paid out will likely increase as well so there might be additional selling pressure as well. But we need to keep in mind that the stakers in the current non-boosted pool could have already switched to the boosted one if they wanted to dump more at some point. So overall, I think this is a good move and also makes it less confusing on the platform.

3 Likes

Switching current emissions from here to boosted pool would decrease sell pressure for melt tokens and it add a “vesting period” for claimable melt, meaning less supply hitting the mkt at these prices.

I also agree that making the platform easier to use/less confusing would be beneficial.

However, the way I’m getting my melt is by buying it in the open mkt from melt incentives and rewards. It would mean less melt for me if prices rise just because of a reduction of emissions instead of because of an increase in TVL, rewards and cashflow streams. An emissions reduction to raise prices dilutes my future ownership of the project’s cashflows - I kinda shot myself in the foot pumping the prices and not trading the pump; lesson learned.

Could the team share who is the biggest TVL in the stables curve pool if they know. My guess is that it is avalanche asia labs as an owner of the multisig. Further increasing melt incentives would increase their stake in the project which I’m not opposed to.

What are current marketing plans to incentivize users to post their LP as collateral in the platform?

3 Likes

Do I understand it correctly that at this point, there is no “10% every 6 days” in the non-boosted pool? If so, then I’m certainly for merging the pools with the same rules, i.e. with possible boosting “10% every 6 days” active.

1 Like

The vesting schedule for MELT mined is present even in the Boost Farm.

1 Like

I support this idea, you may try to move the incentives from the normal Curve pool to the boosted Curve pool