If it was just deployed on optimism. I’d recommend coming back in a couple weeks to see the usage of the protocol.
There are some great incentives here, and we appreciate that you have utilized the community feedback to adjust your OP request, but we believe it’s better to apply once the protocol has been alive for a while.
Definitely, will do then and thanks for your reply! Also might work well in terms of timing since next round will only start on the 8th of September.
TVL at the moment is $900k on Optimism by the way.
It will be a good idea for the Angle Protocol to re-apply a proposal in voting cycle #6, the Angle Protocol is launched on Optimism, (in that term mentioned in this proposal),
the governance funding is aimed at incentivizing projects launched on Optimism, and such incentivization would contribute to the growth of Angle as well as the growth of the Optimism ecosystem.
in the new template summarize the feedback you have got so far.
once new season starts, first week is for community feedback so I assume we will see more engagement here from the community. At the end of first week, summarize all the feedback again on the proposal for delegate/committee feedback in second week.
FWIW: Angle Protocol’s to acquisition and max locking veVELO (4y) demonstrates to me that they are making a long term bet on the Optimism ecosystem and that this isn’t just about a short term liquidity boost.
We also support Angle Protocol’s grant request. They have their own ve-token model that aims to keep LPs invested even after the OP rewards are gone, and they’ve shown themselves to be a top notch team that can deliver.
From defilama, your number to token request is quite high compared to TVL on OP but you have a good TVL on mainnet even in this bear market so with the incentives you might be able to bring some liquidity. I am afraid that most of tvl will be farmers but may be few will stay.
Could you provide details on distribution, weekly/daily/day and pair you are targeting
Also, do you have any KPI ? goal that you want to achieve ?
On co-incentives, I dont think buying token of other project is a co-incentives. What are offering as part of your proposal, that is a co-incentive.
The daily/weekly distribution would entirely depend on the number of pools we incentivize.
Getting OP tokens would help us change our Optimism pools. For now, agEUR/USDC in on a volatile Velodrome pool. With OP tokens as incentives, we could move agEUR/USDC to UniswapV3 where liquidity could be much more efficient. Here, additional incentives could be offered to users leveraging Gamma (cc @BP_Gamma) to provide their liquidity.
At the same time, we are thinking about creating two new volatile Velodrome pools that would be incentivized with OP tokens:
agEUR/ETH
agEUR/OP
This would provide more liquidity to OP, and strenghten agEUR liquidity on Optimism. This is helpful for users wanting to get leverage on their OP tokens through the Angle Borrowing module, one use case that we expect to be especially demanded when the bull market comes back.
KPIs
In terms of KPI, this is pretty straightforward for Angle: growing 1) the number of vaults on Optimism, and 2) the agEUR total supply on Optimism.
By going into more details, with 200k OP (80% of 250k) of incentives distributed linearly over 6 months, $5M of TVL would be receiving an APY of 8% at current prices. This should be enough to bring around $2-3M of agEUR on Optimism on a stable pool.
Co-incentives
In terms of co-incentives, once again we have tokens set aside (5% of the weekly distribution) that could be voted to be distributed as co-incentives on Optimism. As there is no liquidity for ANGLE there yet, this would require to setup a bridge similar to agEUR and build liquidity there, but it is very possible!
A EUR stablecoin is a great value-add to DeFi & Optimism and we generally like the possibility of using (shorting) the EUR in DeFi (vs. other USD-denominated stablecoins).
Appreciate the qualitative analytics and first traction on Optimism since June, the demonstrated long-term move into the Op ecosystem with locking veVelo, and thinking of optimal liquidity usage on Velo / Uni.
250K Op seems to be a reasonably large amount for the size (marketcap) of Angle & the planned Op distribution over 6 months - mainly focusing on agEUR liquidity which is essential for agEUR usage.
We agree, moving (some if not all) token liquidity to l2 should be beneficial for almost all projects as transaction costs don’t eat up purchasing power & execution generally moves up the stack.
Co-incentives would make the proposal much stronger and accelerate growth on Optimism. Why can only 5% be distributed to Optimism as co-incentives? Is that a changeable, votable protocol parameter?
(We only have 0.4% of votable supply and can’t give you a formal approval to move to Snapshot voting.)
In terms of co-incentives, I should have pointed out that we used $90k of the protocol funds to buy and lock VELO to incentivize agEUR pools with VELO tokens. We plan on keep that going, and be split between the different agEUR pools co-incentivized by OP! This can be seen as co-incentives originally coming from Angle protocol reserves.
The 5% of the distribution is what is set aside weekly for temporary programs such as this one. The rest of ANGLE incentives are voted by veANGLE holders on mainnet and distributed between the different gauges. Adding a gauge is a significant process (vote by the DAO + contract deployment), especially when tokens need to be distributed on L2s. Though it is not impossible, the goal of a gauge is definitely not to be temporary which makes it unlikely in this case. Sorry if it may seem uncooperative, but I wouldn’t want to leverage something that I can’t ensure later on.
However, adding an ANGLE gauge could make total sense in 6 months if we get this first pocket of tokens approved and it appears interesting for both Optimism and Angle to continue and reinforce the program!
You can elaborate on both points, keep in mind that this point is one of the most important when making decisions.
You can elaborate more on your incentive program. And in the case of contributors, how are you going to select that they are actually contributing to the ecosystem. Who decides?