derek on Farcaster

Content pfp

https://warpcast.com/~/channel/fc-updates

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

Varun Srinivasan pfp

Varun Srinivasan

Clanker Update Today, we bought 914 $CLANKER for $121,463 using 2/3 of the clanker protocol fees. This brings our total ownership to 4,122 $CLANKER tokens. https://basescan.org/tx/0x6d302f895822cd3025a9217a2abd4ef9fd7a18a6089d45d88ef79da2c65e7543 https://basescan.org/tx/0xfcc53210d60f6ac9c7bdaa88da0e24ae0b373f9def9c1d2780b268bcd3f0a3fb

25 replies

109 recasts

853 reactions

Varun Srinivasan pfp

Varun Srinivasan

I also want to clarify a few things about how fees work: 1. Clanker protocol earns fees in both WETH and project tokens. We only convert the WETH to buy more $CLANKER as of now. 2. A third of fees are reserved for taxes. 3. Using 1% of all $CLANKER trading volume is not a good proxy for fees earned by the protocol. Some fees go to creators, other lps and other pools. The fees earned for each clanker is unique based on market conditions. We'll hopefully have more accurate public dashboards for this soon.

18 replies

22 recasts

209 reactions

derek pfp

Thanks for the clarity - is there currently a plan for the project tokens?

2 replies

0 recast

15 reactions

Jacob pfp

the current plan is to sell clanker project tokens for WETH to buy more clanker, according to @dwr cast from the other day personally, i think a better plan is needed

1 reply

1 recast

4 reactions

derek pfp

Oh I know that's the current plan. Trust me 🤣 My preferred option: give them back to the Clanker creators. A compromise: burn them. Another compromise: hold them indefinitely (worst of all non-sell options). I might write something up here.

6 replies

0 recast

3 reactions

Jacob pfp

i think a burn is fair, too, especially for existing project tokens launched w clanker maybe for future launches, assuming there's disclosure, it could make sense for the protocol to *infinitely sell* tokens earned from fees? but i still think it's a bad strategy, including for clanker

2 replies

0 recast

2 reactions

derek pfp

A burn is anti-creator; it's essentially the "if we can't have it then nobody can" approach. The "infinite sell" is essentially what happens today for folks who choose to receive fees in WETH. And yes, the constant tension for Clanker is the tension between what's best for holders/traders/$CLANKER and what's best for the projects which give Clanker value to begin with. Classic marketplace problem, to be honest. Not easy.

3 replies

0 recast

3 reactions

Trish🫧 pfp

I love a good reduction in supply

1 reply

0 recast

2 reactions

derek pfp

Then do it yourself! Totally ok by me. Burns by the protocol are anti-creator in the sense that they take away the self-sovereignty & autonomy of the creator. Some may burn. Others may lock. Some may burn some, lock some. Some may sell to market. Some may airdrop to the community. Et cetera.

1 reply

0 recast

1 reaction

Trish🫧 pfp

I am speaking of significant size. That couldn’t be me. I mean if they own them then by your measure they should be able to burn them. I am curious how other creators feel. 3 billion bankr burned seems helpful to the project I’m curious what @deployer @tldr and others think too

1 reply

0 recast

1 reaction