• Proposals
  • KIP-9: Protocol Maturation and APY Alignment

Sirob Can't 100% speak to market premium, although I'd love for us to trend towards an increase haha.

Specifically: Thinking is treasury bonding will be more capital efficient. Let's use BCT as a potential example.

Scenario A: - ROI(5-day rate): 8%; We'd expect to see bonding occur around 5%, for something like -
Bond price: 19 BCT; Market price: 20 BCT

Scenario B: -ROI(5-day rate): 6%; We'd expect to see bonding occur around 4%, for something like -
Bond price: 19.2 BCT; Market price: 20 BCT

    optima thanks for responding.

    Regarding 1) wouldn't you say that with a higher KLIMA price the emissions would also be more efficient? See example in OIP-18.

    I am against a further reduction of APY.
    The system is based on a steady influx of new cash and a strong treasury. So instead of forcing existing investors to quit in search of better yields. MAybe it would be best to insentivice new money coming in.

    Either through high APY or better bond discounts. !!!!!
    isnt the goal of KLIMA to squeeze the carbon market? So make bonding of BCT to the treasury more attractive. The result will be a higher backing per KLIMA ++++ a reduced supply of BCT => more valuable BCT /treasury

      nando1001 No one's going to invest in Klima DAO until the 5 day price drop period stopped. Is more valuable for new investors find stability at a lower APYs and bond discounts than loss 10% of their investment each week.

      Ultimately the reason we are having this conversation is because we are currently in a bear phase of the crypto space.

      In the bear phase it is unattractive to bond and it is unattractive to hold Klima because of its speed of depreciation in value, because it's being 'printed' too much.

      In the bull phase it becomes attractive again to bond and hold Klima, because increasing price + high apy = increasing profits. And buying an already price appreciating asset on a discount is super cool.

      When we enter in a bull phase again, Klima will probably already recover.

      Then again why would we complain about APY even going down to 1000? Are we really that greedy that 10xing our money in one year's time is not enough?

      I think lowering apy even to 1000 is a great idea. That should be Plenty for an investor and it will reduce volatility.

        AussieWayne

        Every individual had a chance to participate in the IDO, and when that happened, they took the greatest risk. At the time, there was little development to be shown to the investors.

        AussieWayne And tell me again what reducing the APR did for Ohm's price

        To date, Olympus has done 4 APR reductions:
        70k -> 17k -> 7k -> 1k APY. The marketcap went from 40m at the lowest to the protocol it is today. Imagine if the high APY was kept today. the supply expansion would overtake the revenue generated. The reduction is needed in order for Klima to flourish.

          optima I wasn't aware that the bond discount depends on the APY? I thought it is driven by the bond price, which is driven by the debt ratio (size of bond) and BCV, which is the scaling factor of the DR.
          So when you say "we'd expect to see", do you mean people would base the decision whether to bond and how much on the APY vs other factors? Or do I misunderstand that?

            This is basically a required improvement. APY reduction vastly improves the outcomes for the protocol. We are here to build for a long time. I am fully in support of this.

              Much to early and too massive reduce for now! Reduce slowly, coz otherwise again many investors will be not happy, especially those who buy very high (like me)

              reduce weekly or monthly over a period of 6 months, give us chance to reduce our losses!

              thanks

              Brian33 yeah if you buyed for 10$ you are right, otherwise pls think about those who buyed for 2000$

              JohnT 100000% word up!!! Feel exactlöy the same and its true!! early investors acting very selfish!!!

              Burtrico who make this chart look terryfing?? i think the ico and presale buyers do it, constantly taking out money, not caring for the project, only caring for profits. thats terrible for such a project.

              Absolutely going for both. Hence there is need to reduce the APY for a sustainable growth ahead...

              No to both. There are other measures to take first, to make ramping on easier for newcomers instead of via sushi only. What is more, before we speak of any reduction, how about all pklima is cancelled? And we still need to know how much klima from aklima is still in wallets ready to crush the price. Be transparent.

              grap Totally agree with this. This point has been brought up in the Office Hours before, to request the policy team to be more sensitive to investors’ concern over the current price action, especially when communicating new policies for the long term health of the protocol. Right now, even if the protocol is growing its treasury and reaching carbon targets, the success of the protocol isn’t really translating into the success of investors’ returns as yet. Surely these policies will have some effect on price action, as some have pointed out in this forum discussion, however these are not included as considerations upfront in the KIPs.

              As someone who got into Klima when the price was down from ATH but still in the four digits right before the never-ending dip, it’s never easy to see the portfolio 85% down and with no guarantee of easing up. While I was very excited about Klima and still believe in the vision of the DAO and the team, I’m also not here to throw away hard-earned money. The sharp decrease in price is really penalizing the early investors of the project, and it’s a hard pill to swallow.

              Having said that, I know the project team is probably tackling issues as they come, as all start-ups do, and also working really hard towards the very exciting prospect of making Klima the centre of the on-chain carbon ecosystem, so thank you, your hard work is much appreciated.

              TLDR: Change the APY if you must, because the pragmatist in me understands that the project needs to survive the crypto winter, and flourish for a long long time to come, otherwise there’s zero chance of me recouping my initial investment, let alone make some returns off this. Let’s vote survival over short term gains.

              let's get this APY to more sustainable level. Agree with this proposal

              Maybe create snapshot whitelist addresses that have staked 30 days or more to keep current APY with gradual decrease over X months. Create new stake vault for 1000%APY migrate stakers less than 30 days and allow all new stakers.

              Please don't decrease the APY again so quickly after two previous decreases. I fully understand the need for a further APY decrease over time as the project matures. However, this feels way too quick and not the right moment. Price has been downtrending for quite some time now, with a lot of (dare I say most) investors already heavily underwater. Decreasing APY again will make them bleed even more, plus it will likely trigger even more sell-off and accelerate the drop in price. I fear this will have an adverse effect and not help the treasury grow at all.

              Like some people suggested, I'm all for a gradual decrease over a longer period of time.

              Brian33

              I reiterate again

              “Do not expect those who have paid those sorts of high prices to see the dream in the same manner as the IDO participants
              The first group are looking at this from deep underwater whilst the IDO group have their rose coloured glasses firmly on and are now protecting their position at the expense of the others. Selfish actions indeed.”

              My point was not whether they took risk because they did and with risk comes reward as it should be. It is about the current perspective from which the different groups view these current proposals and you have ignored this because it does not fit neatly into your narrative. One is in a position of losing vast amounts of money whilst the other is enjoying huge profits. The truth is that without the support of the later comers the IDO group could well have been in a negative position. So show some respect to those who created the position for you to be able to sit in your lofty position looking down at us.
              By all means reduce the APR because it is unsustainable for the future but do it in a TRANSPARENT structured and pre published lineal manner instead of this ambush economics that you have sprung upon us. Unless of course we are ACTUALLY in a much worse position than most of us believe and this urgent action is akin to applying CPR.
              The difference between a rug pull and the Klima price today is but a mere 2%