Not sure whether to call it v2/v2.5 or v3. I’ve been spending too much time inside my head working on this, and was not able to catch up with recent news and updates.
I Decided to put it in a google slide presentation to accomodate the illustrations and so I can easily arrange text boxes for each paragraphs. (31 slides in total)
Kindly excuse my grammar and poor choices of words. English is not my native languange.
PART 1-3: INTRO to 3 main features
PART 4-7: Illustrations
PART 8: Rationales
PART 9: My background
PART 10: Other Proposals
PART 11: Closing
Part 12: Extras
Link to Google Slides:
This is very well thought out and I really like the idea of the utility given to ANC as bonded early interest payment. It works great with the new v2 Anchor borrow model.
How would this bonded ANC early interest payment work if a user is liquidated?
Finally had the time to go through it, this is great and you may have solved the issue I have with the official v2 proposal, your proposal makes way for an incentive to pay down loans without forcing users to, while also adding a reason to borrow if you want to hold ANC.
I like it, and I see it as a great complement to the official proposal.
My only concern is that if the cost to borrow remains the same, at first glance it may seem so unattractive that no one will look past that and into the rebate system, but with some clever UI that can perhaps make the user aware.
wow a lot to read…very interesting ideas around ANC token etc. Sure some of this could help in the long run.
My concern with the other original v2 and this proposal is that i’d prefer to stay be with bAsset Model.
This is the unique selling point of Anchor no other lending market has. If Anchor changes this it will work like aave or abracadabra. I understand that adding new bAssets always takes a lot of time. But that’s again something that protects Anchor.
A lot of your ideas would work with the current model around bAssets.
there’s a lot of technical aspects Im not equipped to answer ser, or maybe i messed my words on that “concept overview number 9” somehow, where i described it as “quasi-insurance for liquidated colateral”. I was thinking if the borrower has ACTIVE rebates/bonded ANC early interest work but then got liquidated halfway, he can receive part of ANC he is ought to receive. ex. he bonded 20 ANC and got liquidated while still bonding 10 ANC. I was thinking maybe the liquidation contract calls the rebate contract to executesending a part of that 10 ANC instantly, or at the same it got liq.? honestly, i dont know how contracts work at any level, do you think this is possible? I’d really appreciate if you dumb it down for me.
I agree with your concern. but if we manage to stretch what was left of borrow incentives from scheduled emission, the borrow UI might still see the DIST APR for 8 more years and still receive free ANC, while rebate button is added. thanks for the kind words! I still need to gather info on the proposed borrow model, got lost track of anything working on this.
Thanks. I still need to gather info on the proposed borrow model, got lost track of anything working on this. Maybe we can gather more info on the twitter space with flipside.
Can we merge this discussion with the v2 proposal forum post as ongoing discussion?
Absolutely wonderful work on this one!
Thanks. I think the team is already cooking something for ANC tokenomics, and v2 borrow model is priority. Weighing on this can wait.
Correct v2 is needed first. We can then add to it very easily once released
Anything is pretty much theoretically possible but this is a bit complicated with vesting/bonding since there would be schedules once locked if you allow removing after locked, for refunds or whatever, you have to start creating taxes or something for those that remove early. This means things have to be tracked creating different contracts - I will have to think more on it.
Great work and much needed conversation around PoL and ANC value accrual. Love the Rebate approach which could theoretically allow ANC to trade opposite direction in a market downtrend. If this actually materialised, that would be the only PR it needs to skyrocket.
I would love to read the big brains challenging your ideas, as to me they look like much needed improvements…
hey just an update on your proposal, While not bonds larix is effectively doing this on solana and it’s been very effective so far for the 2 weeks its been implemented.
It will be a good case study to follow in regards to data for this proposal.
Let’s look at Larix protocol for a bit and see how it’s helping them, they’ve launched a similar idea to this proposal, complete with the early withdrawal tax. It’s more LP staking but the way it’s structured it’s sort of like bonds. It’s very interesting and we share a lot of parallels so if it does help we should see some results from their implementation on their token value.
They have a 90 day and 180 day schema and just launched late Jan so we have some time (late april-may) to analyse their data and see if the price impact is worthwhile.