Regarding B, what value does having TRU in the hands of a lot of liquidity providers bring? It sounds like a startup trying to get their company stock into the hands of as many people as possible, which I can’t imagine any business wanting to do.
As an aside, I agree a small airdrop(preferably to people on competing loan platforms) would be an easier way to do it.
I think this also works. Migrating all rewards to sushiswap in 1 week will allow the same rewards emission to a new pool and attract more users. Personally I feel TRU staking, and TFI-LP lending pool should be the only incentivized pool since its been 3 months post launch and we need to minimize TRU emission to pools which don’t directly bring value to the platform
This is a no-brainer with Sushi rewards as well. TFI-LP/TUSD should be migrated to sushiswap to take these incentives so TRU incentivies can be phased out and only reserved for TFI-LP and TRU stakers. I fully support moving TFI-LP/TUSD to sushiswasp. Uniswap is good but incentives for sushiswap is good from an LP perspective
Yep TRU burn should remain consistent at sushiswap as well, otherwise inflation is too large
Re: Raising Borrower Interest Rates & Pool APY
@Raccoon - I don’t see how big borrowers have a great deal more leverage than smaller ones when it comes to “free money” - both stand to gain more (in financial terms, relative % gain from their investments than their loan interest) from taking out a loan than in not taking one. We just haven’t found the upper bound of “is still a good loan for borrowers, while producing the maximum APY for lenders.”
Re: Airdrop Option to 2500 wallets:
@rafaelcosman - an airdrop does not provide the same benefits as a yield farm, in at least 4 key ways:
I can probably come up with a few more reasons against and maybe a few for, but with possible exception, I’d vote no on any airdrop.
Re: farming with corporate capital:
While I don’t have a strong opinion on this, I’ve heard good arguments for and against.
Re: TRU in more hands:
@rattlecage - what happens when shares of company stocks are in the hands of a non-core team member? At the best case, they create value by word of mouth (which really mains the primary marketing mechanic in DeFi - friends telling friends about new projects, coins, and earning opportunities).
I’d argue there’s a point where “value added by new members” > “cost of token/cost to token price” but it’s extremely hard to compare because (a) the returns of community are difficult to measure while token price/supply IS, and (b) the impact of community is a very long tail effect, while price impact is short term.
Even if the minority of recipients behave this way (consider: DeFi is literally built on this mechanic - give away tokens, nurture community of those who’ve held, collaborate with them in building a platform they and others will use - so it’s highly likely SOME will stay and contribute), the likelihood of them staying is based on the perceived promise of the project - which I think TrueFi has, as what appears to be the prime contender in uncollateralized lending.
My vote is for a full migration to Sushi
Agree. The attractiveness of the project to lenders does not linear to the APY. The effect of increasing lenders returns is limited. What we have to do is to promote the trustworthiness and safety of capital in our lending pools, which would make the lenders have a more risk-adjusted returns. Competiting APY, we can never be as high as 150% that leveraging Defi projects like Alpha Finance are providing. But for risks, we are significantly lower. We have to let others know this point.
Agree with full migration to sushiswap
Agree with full migration to sushiswap
I’m an ALPHA token holder and the trading volume mining program with Sushiswap has helped run their price up from $.25 to over $1 in a matter of weeks. I don’t know much about the program itself or if that’s something TruFi can do but it would be a huge net positive for TrueFi’s awareness and coin price from what I saw with Alpha Homora
Sushiswap is a Yearn Finance company and is clearly the future of DeFi. We need to position ourselves on a marketplace that is growing in popularity and Sushiswap is killing Uniswap right now in terms of volume growth. If the migration makes it easier for us to work with companies like Alpha and Cream in the future to provide more complex and attractive product offerings, then it seems like a no-brainer. and you guys are right in that we can’t merely compete on APY, after a certain threshold people aren’t simply looking for numbers, I’d imagine they want less risk (farm with a big brand who will be around for a long time, a token price that is stable or going up in value) and easier access (USDC is a must). From a marketing perspective announcing that we’re switching to Uniswap in order to proactively position ourselves competitively with the likes of Alpha, Cream, and the Yearn network should have a huge impact on our coin.
I couldn’t agree more with this statement. 
After truly robust discussion with you all and the core TrustToken team, we’ve arrived at a proposed path forward that hopefully incorporates all of the important points in making this decision: marketing to a new audience, maintaining healthy DEX liquidity, preventing an increase in TRU outflows, and being responsible with the TRU treasury while balancing allowing new DeFi farmers to take maximum advantage of the new opportunity.
This proposal is for the migration of the Uniswap farm to Sushiswap. I propose the following:
Q&A: Why not move the full pool amount?
TrustToken is a major LP for the Uniswap pool, where the company is burning the tokens farmed as an LP (for at least a few more months). This provides DEX liquidity without dramatically increasing TRU supply. TrustToken would like to let the Sushiswap pool grow free of corporate capital, to maximize the pool attractiveness to and diversity of LPs - in effect, more new people to hear about TrueFi via the pool.
However, moving over the full Uniswap pool without earn-and-burn using TrustToken capital would mean a lot more TRU entering the market. Lowering the daily TRU/ETH farm outflows is a way of compromising between earn-and-burn using corporate capital active in the pool and maximizing benefits of the pool for new LPs.
That said, with SUSHI rewards incorporated into the farm via Onsen, the net TRU/ETH pool APY should still be higher than the Uniswap pool is right now - especially considering LPs (not TrustToken Inc) will capture all the upside.
Discuss as needed in this thread, and please vote to approve if you agree with the proposal. Poll will be brief, likely no longer than 1-3 days, as most elements have been adequately discussed, imo.
0 voters
Thanks @MG-TT for making this proposal- I’m strongly in favor. I think this is an excellent synthesis of the various viewpoints.
Everyone, thank you all for voting in favor of this Sushiswap migration proposal.
Please signal your support in Snapshot to take this all the way!
https://snapshot.page/#/truefigov.eth/proposal/QmckiWBwpPhsEhcN4sFF2C2rNL2G6U5wQPr7aRXYLmjweY