The last piece that is left to talk about is the weekly Liquidity Mining rewards.
In total 35 million GIV will be allocated to the Liquidity Providers in the firs 6 months after the launch. This will of course be 10% liquid at launch and the rest streaming over the next 5 years.
The post above described the details that were agreed to saying we will allocate following this distribution:
Pool
Tokens Allocated
GIV/ETH Uniswap V3 on Mainnet
10mil GIV
80GIV/ETH Balancer on Mainnet
2.5mil GIV
GIV Staking on Mainnet
2.5mil GIV
50GIV/HNY Honeyswap on xDai
10mil GIV
50GIV/WETH Sushiswap on xDai
2.5mil GIV
GIVgardens/staking on xDai
7.5mil GIV
There has been a lot of discussions over the last months… which has led to this proposal.
I propose that we follow the 1 Wave to Rule them all pattern, which has its own ghetto simulation here: GIVdistro Final! - Google Tabellen
The idea with this set up is that at the beginning there is a lot of incentive to put your GIV tokens into the Liquidity pools instead of selling the airdrop. that amount decreases until week 15 where it begins to increase again to match the increased supply from the Stream… until week 21 where it starts to decrease as we transition to another liquidity provision strategy.
The Uniswap V3 rewards will have to remain constant during the 26 weeks, rewarding 384,615 tokens every week for technical reasons. But the other pools will have variable rates such that the total allocated follows a wave pattern:
Week
% Allocated that week
Week 1
7.75%
Week 2
7.75%
Week 3
6.00%
Week 4
6.00%
Week 5
4.75%
Week 6
4.75%
Week 7
3.75%
Week 8
3.75%
Week 9
3.25%
Week 10
3.25%
Week 11
3.00%
Week 12
3.00%
Week 13
3.00%
Week 14
3.00%
Week 15
3.25%
Week 16
3.25%
Week 17
3.50%
Week 18
3.50%
Week 19
3.75%
Week 20
3.75%
Week 21
3.25%
Week 22
3.25%
Week 23
2.75%
Week 24
2.75%
Week 25
2.00%
Week 26
2.00%
This is also broken down in great detail in the Distro Rows 44-160:
I thought in the OG plan we would be incentiving liquidity more on xDAI than mainnet? I see there’s a hefty sum of single asset staking but I remember a lot of initial conversations around bringing liquidity to xDAI to empower the network in general.
yes the REWARDS will be there, but that doesn’t translate to liqudity, single asset staking doesn’t boost liquidity of the GIV token, (as we’ve seen with NODE) in order to empower the xDAI network we need people to contribute stronger assets like WETH, xDAI, HNY ( I guess). So I see there’s a 50/50 split inbetween the two “liquidity provision” programs.
How does this align with the higher level narratives of creating thriving economies on xDAI?
My own qualms with mainnet is just the sluggishness to fix the gas issues. These gas issues effectively “price out” smaller players from having a seat at the table.
From conversations with BrightID folks and others, many people only think a token is “legit” if it’s on mainnet. For this reason, we decided to mint GIV on mainnet, and then bridge it all over xDai to distribute to all the things.
It’s good to remember that the GIVdrop & rewards from GIVbacks are all on xDai… so people have GIV on xDai and it’s easier to just go use the farms & opportunities on xDai. This is one way we’re working on creating thriving economies on xDai, by doing most of our action there.
To get GIV to mainnet, they’d have the bridge it over for the most part (unless they’re getting GIV from a mainnet exchange or earning it from liquidity mining rewards on mainnet) so we want the mainnet GIVfarm to be attractive and motivate people to bridge.
The reason the pool is so big for the xDai staking is because this is what we use to reward both pure single-asset stakers and voters in the GIVgarden (in this case, staking is actually also wrapping… but the stakers don’t have to use those tokens to vote).
I totally hear what you’re saying though, just adding some info to the discussion.
Also worth noting though… the rewards amounts going to each pool has already been agreed to as per the Final GIV Distribution, so changing it now is kind of going backwards. The main purpose of this extra post is because the previous post and agreement didn’t outline the “wave” or the breakdown for the first 26 weeks.
I think its worth mentioning that hopefully we will try to acquire liquidity our selves during this 6 month period… so if we need to focus on one chain over the other we can do that with our liquidity acquisition efforts
What do you think?