Proposal Submitted: Snapshot
The purpose of this proposal is to bring light to the fact that the ENCHANT mechanism has not brought about the results we had originally surmised and has a number of negative externalities as a result of its implementation. I will outline the negatives and propose a manner to resolve these inefficiencies while simultaneously increasing the value and utility of our native token SOUL.
Reasons to Remove ENCHANT
||Our native token - SOUL - is in desperate need of liquidity and when we add more tokens to our list of assets, we risk losing much-needed deeper pockets of liquidity. This leads to a highly volatile and price-sensitive SOUL as a result of the liquidity that could've otherwise gone to SOUL being taken up for ENCHANT instead.
||The rewards from ENCHANT are difficult to comprehend and capture in a traditional manner, such as the corresponding APR / APY and is thus unappealing to those who makes their investment decisions off these key metrics and prevents us from providing a benchmark for our success on this metric.
||Aggressively incentivizing another asset along with its pairs depletes the APR for the other key pairs we must prioritize in order to be a fully-operable DEX. The number of farms and the amount of allocation given to these farms greatly detracts from our priorities, which should be SOUL and key pairs users expect to see on any exchange. This prevents us from staying competitive with protocols such as SpookySwap and SpiritSwap when we lack a higher APR on pairs such as ETH/BTC as we give away too much allocation towards ENCHANT.
||Majority of our value as a DEX comes from our volume and ENCHANT has one of the lowest volumes compared to other assets we incentivize.
We would enable users to use the EXIT function in order to acquire the underlying SEANCE, which is a simple and easy resolution and involves very little effort to utilize.
In lieu of rewards going towards ENCHANT, I further propose those fees are utilized to buy back and burn SOUL, which would make our primary asset more appealing and would provide further value to holding SOUL, which has been highly-requested by the community.
Voting takes place here: Snapshot
In full agreement with Buns on this. I was unsure how I felt about it initially, but after reviewing the proposal and the reasoning, I believe it’s the right choice.
I liked the concept of $ENCHANT and the 3-token economy, but as mentioned, it does leave us spread too thin, and the added complexity was probably just confusing to a lot of casual users. Let’s trim the fat and consolidate.
(Speaking of which, especially in light of the recent hack, I would also consider removing the Grim autocompound farms for much the same reasons: to keep all of our emissions and attention on SoulSwap itself. I know auto-compounding was a feature people wanted, but after what happened I doubt anyone’s too thrilled about the prospect of using Grim, and we really don’t need an auto-compounding version of every farm that we have, which only puts extra sell pressure on $SOUL… Unless I’m mistaken, PancakeSwap only has auto-compounding for their native token staking, for instance. EDIT: Following this logic, adding our own auto-compounding that applies only to $SOUL single-staking would also push all the “set it and forget it” people to increase their exposure to $SOUL, thus reducing sell pressure, increasing buy pressure, and making them more personally invested in our longterm success, as well as possibly allowing the auto-compounders to still benefit from SEANCE, and AURA if that was not already the case.)
Personally, I’m especially keen on the $SOUL buybacks and burns part. Having low emissions is great, but it is much less obvious and lacks the psychological impact and marketing value that burns would provide us (depending on the schedule and presentation, it can be an exciting event with flashy attractive numbers that comes across as bullish news every time).
Enchant pool has been good but agree with your comment about helping us grow. However to pull out the LP pools will realise considerable IL, for me particularly FTM losses. Can the LP be transferred to FTM-Seance ? Where does LUX sit in the spreading thin argument?
I don’t want to agree, but I do.
Luxor isn’t a topic for discussion here, but you’re welcome to include in a separate topic, if you find it necessary. As for the LP, there is unfortunately no simple solution to IL and it is just part of the territory in DeFi. No one has to remove liquidity, however it is not a high-performing asset in terms of volume, so though a tradeoff, perhaps consider the benefits that come from more valuable exposure from pairing with a more popular pair, such as SOUL-FTM or SEANCE-FTM. Unfortunately, there is no way to provide a 1-1 trade of SEANCE-FTM : ENCHANT-FTM, but fortunately every ENCHANT will forever be backed by the ratio of ENCHANT-SEANCE, so when anyone wants to exit, that liquidity / opportunity exists for them.
Overall, in the long-term, this will benefit the protocol as a whole and ideally those gains will offset and temporary losses that occur along the way as we shift gears towards focusing on building a solid foundation for those assets that work best for us and our longevity. Ultimately, on the exchange side of the protocol, our goal is to isolate those pairs with the most value-added and to incentivize farming or bonding those pairs, so users have an optimal trading experience with as little slippage as possible.
Anything that benefits the protocol, I agree 100%.
Enchant does become kinda obsolete with the direction soulswap is now headed
This removes platform complexity and increases liquidity of core asset. Makes total sense, no brainer imo. I don’t hold ENCHANT so perhaps easy for me to say, but the implementation sounds solid.
I too will suffer considerable IL losses…
Maybe a small incentive for those breaking up their enchant-ftm LP (dont even know if possible)?
Completely agree with all of this. The negative feedback cycle needs to be broken, so focus on making soul an attractive hold is essential. Bonds also add to sell pressure in the short term, but once their aprs settle down a bit, some positive exposure can quickly turn the tide now free emissions have been reduced significantly.
I’m happy to go along with this. I have a lot of Enchant and I like the mechanism of staking the Seance to get Ench so that I get increasing SEANCE. Will that mechanism still exist, just not called ENCHANT but instead Shares as it is now or will there be some other way to stake SEANCE and reap the benefits of protocol fees?
No, but the protocol fees would instead be used for buybacks and burns of $SOUL, which would have a positive impact on the price of both $SOUL and $SEANCE.
Sounds like a solid idea to keep the momentum after Luxor, enchant really only benefits those who hold a hell of a lot of it anyways, a new user with $2,000 wouldn’t even give it a shot and might turn them off. I hold a bit of it but business is business and this is a nice follow up especially to capture liquidity before other soon to be released snd hyped up protocols open up, I’m selling mine right now lol