This was the solution I was hoping for. But pretty hard to suggest “Let’s spend a corporation’s money that I own no shares of.” 70 million UST into the yield reserve is amazing. Now it’s time for major financial institutions to look at Anchor and ask, “Do we ape in too?”
1 Like
Ok I hope the cash injection along with the imminent introduction of the improvements listed above gives a good chance of getting to long term sustainability.
Cool to see that some of the proposals discussed in this thread added to their plans, perhaps the discussion was useful after all. Thanks everyone for contributing 
1 Like
Given the above, it seems reasonable to consider a
Thresholdrate of 15% instead of the current 18% as one of our options to achieve our goal.
I think the way it works right now is rate(target)=20% and rate(threshold)=18%. The deposit rate floats between 18-20% but when it goes bellow 18%, the reserve kicks in and returns it to 20%.
So changing the rate(threshold) to 15% would not fix this since the deposit rate is being sustained at rate(target) by the yield reserve not rate(threshold).
In my opinion, when the yield reserves are being used Anchor should use the yield reserves to reach rate(threshold) not rate(target). Did I get this right @ryanology045 , is there a reasoning for the way it currently works?
It used to be 18-20% but it was changed to 19.5% - 20.5% in a recent vote. If the actual rate goes below 19.5%, reserves kick in to keep it at around 19.5%
Actually the yield reserve only covers to the threshold rate as mentioned by @Juanouo.
1 Like