GDP-04126 - GDP6 (Sepolia): Bond X

ghostDAO Governance
,
1

Dear ghostDAO Community

I would like to submit a proposal.

Function 1
create LP Bond on ghostDAO (Sepolia) - Bond X.

Market Price is 0.17 WETH (~ $339.00 DAI).

There are 2 main objectives:

  • Acquire more LP tokens to maximize ghostDAO POL share

  • Expand Market Cap-to-RFV ratio

The Bond will start its offering at par to the market price. But the discount will keep increasing based on the programmatic Dutch Auction rules.

Bond X Specs: #bondX

Initial Bond Price = 5815/10^9 x 1 LP (~ $339.00 DAI)

Capacity = 0.0092 LP (~535,000 DAI) into Treasury

Target Deposit Interval = 1 Hour

Tune = 4 Hours

Market Duration = Until 11:59:59PM EST on Tue, Mar 10.

Goals: acquire POL and expand MCap-to-RFV Ratio

Function 2
auditReserves function to update ghostDAO Treasury reserves.

Function 3
setAdjustment function to update the APY. Current APY of 20,302% has been disrupted by massive demand in Bond 8, which resulted in significant supply increase and corresponding RFV per 1 eCSPR drop below $100 DAI.

To slow down the increase in eCSPR supply, the APY is suggested to be dropped from 20,302% down to 919.7%. Assuming treasury does not grow and no new bonds are sold, the APY of 919.7% will result in the RFV drop to about $50 DAI within 90 days.

1 Like
2

While an APR of .6% per day is still remarkably good. It’s nowhere near the 1.4% per day we are currently getting! My limited understanding is suggesting that adding backing to the tune of 535k, (if we meet this goal) and suggesting an average 30% discount on the CSPR price from the bond, would mint ~1900 CSPR making the tot supply… ~8700 CSPR. The added 535k puts the treasury over 1.1 Million, which places the backing to~ $130/CSPR,!!! If this calculation is correct we would be in a very healthy position. Of course this isn’t even calculating the added benefit of earning the protocol more DEX fees. We should definitely get this bond going ASAP so we can keep the APY UP FOR AS LONG AS POSSIBLE!!!

3 Likes
3

Great analysis!! And it seems correct as well.

Unfortunately, the back-end issues prevented this proposal from being executed. Reason being: the APY can only be within 2.5% per epoch (8 hours) from the previous rate.

Hence, since setAdjustment function failed - the entire proposal comprised of 3 functions failed as well. Let’s make a technically correct proposal this time :grinning_face: :ghost:

2 Likes