unbanksy (yes/acc) (unbanksy)

gm

• 0 replies
• 0 recasts
• 0 reactions

Lots of discourse focuses on optimizing the cap table (ie lockups, allos, vc vs team) but I want to bring to attention something more fundamental: liquidity and utility of the token. Most token launches today launch a vanilla erc-20 into a poorly thought out liquidity pool (mostly uni V2). And then add complex ve- and options vesting solutions to control supply emissions. This almost always results in poor price action and the blame is always on the cap table. The contrarian solution space @baselinemarkets is exploring is around making liquidity and utility native to the token. So every bToken launches with its own liquidity, logic for rebalancing that liquidity, and native staking, lending and leverage markets to bring utility on day one.

• 1 reply
• 0 recasts
• 1 reaction

Three ways this leads to superior outcomes: 1. Entire supply is accounted for by the protocol. The lockups can still happen but it’s all on chain and protocol is “prepared” for it. There’s never surprise vested emissions that rekt the chart 2. There’s guaranteed liquidity and this liquidity is based on the entire cap table. So every token can be sold. These guarantees do not exist in tokens with exogenous liquidity provided by eg VCs or market makers. 3. Broad participation by all types of market participants - long-term holders are incentivized to hold via staking from trading fees. Short-term speculators can access leverage on day 1. Risk-off investors can borrow and take the underlying reserves at 0% interest. The cap table still matters ofc but solving subpar tokenomics alleviates much of the gripe I see today

• 0 replies
• 0 recasts
• 1 reaction

Gm

• 1 reply
• 0 recasts
• 0 reactions