Hello Christian 
Thank you for providing the first batch of insightful questions!
If this proposal passes, TrueFi would own Teragon and its IP indefinitely. TrueFi would probably decide to discontinue Teragon. The 30-week contract would allow TrueFi to fully leverage Teragon’s assets: the technology, IP, methodologies, and everything else we offer with 2 technical co-founders.
They could be migrated to TrueFi or refunded, this would be up to TrueFi.
(Replying this first, as it is relevant for the next question too.)
Over the past year, we have paused active development on Teragon. Despite our efforts, we couldn’t achieve product-market fit and used up most of our treasury. Launching a token, implementing token-based incentives, or raising Series A were potential paths. However, to avoid risking more capital during the bear market, we chose to cut costs and enter a dormant phase.
The most Teragon contracts has hold was $3m. We haven’t had a security incident for 2 years. The X thread on loss of funds is about the Euler Finance hack effecting the vault investors.
An interesting fact from the thread: The vault manager were not able to extract the collateral and that would be the only option for a statically programmed index. However, they were able to take out a loan as a last resort, worth 70% of the potential 100% loss.
3 weeks later, Euler has recovered their stolen assets and our vault investors bounced back from -3% to positive returns.
We are not proposing to take on the responsibilities of Wallfacer. Instead, the proposal is for TrueFi to utilize Teragon’s products and to transfer our technology, documentations, methodologies, and more.
I believe that TrueFi should have contractors or employees for this purpose, and we will do our best to ensure a smooth handover so that they are as knowledgeable about Teragon’s assets as we are now.
That said, my co-founder and I are aligned with TrueFi. If the need arises and we are available, we would be willing to assist with anything outside of this proposal.
We haven’t been audited and as indicated in the timeline, we will manage the auditing process. Beforehand, we will go over the contract, backend and frontend projects, review, document, add additional tests and do internal audits. There’ll be decisions to be made with stakeholders and development for integrating with existing TrueFi contracts and frontends. For the contracts, ERC-4626 compatibility and protocol fee will be among them. The development and deployment flows would be integrated into what TrueFi already has.
I agree that “ready to go” was not clear. While our products were already operational, they were not initially designed to integrate with TrueFi. Ensuring a smooth handover will be essential so that the IP can become an integral part of TrueFi after our contract.
Great point. Yes, we haven’t worked on credit infrastructure but have focused on generalized vault products. Proposing the acquisition of similar technology wouldn’t make sense anyway.
With this acquisition, TrueFi could create in-house structured products based on credit products. TrueFi’s beta index vaults have shown us there’s a valuable opportunity for joining forces.
The strategy for TrueFi, if we join, and the specific products to be deployed would be determined by the leadership and business development teams. We would share the technical possibilities, offer our opinions, and once agreed upon, deliver what is asked.