More USDC is more optionality, and any organization is only as strong as its dry powder. With the launch of Solid World, the DAO has a well-aligned outlet for market making forwards + USDC pools for at least 10% yield (much more favorable and aligned than something like Aave). We have a clear path for growing our asset base via environmental markets.
With the splitting of Carbonmark - there will not need to be robust software development underneath KlimaDAO. The protocol is largely feature complete with a nearly automated AKR framework, retirement bonds, pools to trade, and a marketplace to list underlying pooled projects.
Simply put: USDC should be increased and used to directly benefit $KLIMA holders.
Those benefits will take the form of forward purchases at favorable prices, USDC pairing for yield on Solid World, the delivery of forwards used to make more KLIMA/CARBON spot pools, and ultimately the creation of a sustainable forwards purchases: USDC Deployed (KlimaDAO) -> yield farmed (Solid World) -> carbon sold (Carbonmark, at markup) -->More USDC Deployed -> etc. etc. etc.
This will be a profitable business line that supports $KLIMA and future R&D, whether that R&D occurs internally or externally.
USDC deployment can and should also take the form of directly favorable initiatives that support the token price. This can compliantly take the form of things like inverse bonds, or (even better) something that we will see soon that I am informally calling improved inverse bonds.
Ad-hoc KIPs will be replaced with a comprehensive forwards business line once the initial Solid World pools are finished being launched, such that the process of purchase, deployment, and sale can be automated completely with the DAO voting on decisions at the buy stage.
Funding requests from the DAO will never again take the shape of one large, omnibus ask for multiple departments. This is irresponsible. Commingled budgets create ambiguity at scale.
Budget asks will be targeted and specific in their scope so that token holders understand what they are approving. The model that I will pursue with my department will be smaller, specific funding asks that will be showcased during the next round of budget asks.
Carbonmark has been an interesting case study. Breaking off chunks of capital to build an external business to the DAO is perhaps a model that can be recreated. If Carbonmark is able to flow value back: there will be more value to go around and recreate the model. If not: we will need to run the DAO as pragmatically as possible and lean into our competitive advantages.
Protocol innovation will always be driven inside of KlimaDAO, but there is also considerable room and now a precedent for innovation to be driven by a formal corporation that applies to KlimaDAO for funding. We will see whether the need arises and similar situations can be repeated, as the primary constraint is the USDC that remains under the control of the DAO. KlimaDAO will always have more efficient markets with lower fees, and while we can not control the broader market - we can continue to bring more people & more assets to the markets we make.
As an environmental asset market maker, KlimaDAO will always benefit when the market for our assets grow, when trading occurs, and when retirements increase. Bringing more assets onto our platform will be a key lever for compounding these gains when activity increases. The USDC should always go to the most accretive options on the table to benefit our token holders - at this point in time that is driving value to $KLIMA and expanding $KLIMA markets.