[Governance Proposal] Reduce Inflationary VKR Rewards

Thanks for the reply TerraFormer.

Point taken… however, Valkyrie Protocol is clearly unique, as with all protocols on Terra, and should not be compared, one with another.

I only ask that you fully analyze the source of the selling pressure in question before arbitrarily cutting LP staking rewards. Messing around with the established tokenomics could have radical and unforseen consequences… Valkyrie Protocol is not a DEGEN experiment.

Have you even considered that maybe VKR’s true value/worth is $0.35, at this moment in time. This being said, maybe it’s better to build outwards rather than trying to fix something that isn’t broken.

Tread carefully… the proposed changes to LP staking rewards could potentially result in a further lose of money to everyone invested in the protocol… including yourself.

Take care and all the best! - SEVEN

1 Like

Given that it seems like that the proposal will pass to reduce VKR inflationary staking rewards, I think it may be good for the community to discuss:

  1. The specific amount of VKR to be reduced
  2. Uses for the VKR arising from the LP/Gov staking reduction.

The team has been hinting on new products to be released on the protocol, so I think perhaps @RyanJang @BChang_admin and the rest of the team can chime in on whether or not the VKR can be redirected to some of these new undertakings?

Esteemed Valkyrie Community:

Since the inception of this proposal, no factual or usable data has been provided to validate the following claim: Liquidity Provider (LP) staking rewards are too high and create “overwhelming downward sell pressure” on VKR. Please advise if I am incorrect.

Therefore, the proposal is based on pure assumption, rather than fact. Without hard factual data to support the reasoning behind this proposal, I believe it would be ludicrous to consider a reduction of LP staking rewards, and much less, the actual amount.

“Assumptions are made and most assumptions are wrong” - Albert Einstein

Furthermore, the protocol already has established tokenomics that raise and lower LP staking rewards based on various factors. Example: LP staking rewards were above 700% when I first minted LP tokens, but currently the rewards are at 325%.

Please cease-and-desist all activities related to reducing the established LP staking rewards until hard factual data is provided in support of the proposal.

Much thanks in advance for your attention and consideration in this matter.

  • SEVEN

We have confirmed that the above has passed governance.

Therefore, we will summarize and share specific opinions and listen to them.

1 Like

Valkyrians… I hope you’re enjoying the best of days!

Would it be technically possible, and economically beneficial, to payout Liquidity Provider (LP) staking rewards in UST, rather than VKR?

In theory, this would convert selling pressure into buying pressure for LPs that wish to restake their rewards, and/or stake them into Governance.

Additionally, LPs that decide to cash out their rewards would not be required to sell-off.

Any thoughts?

1 Like

hello, not much time has passed, but as you can see, reducing the rewards has done nothing and will not do. In my opinion, we should consider introducing larger rewards (for example, when staking at 30,000% on the spectrum of the VKR-UST pair, the value started to go up) only such actions can bring the effect now we have 1/4 MC on VKR from ath. My idea does not end only with increasing the rewards, but it should be supported by burning VKR at a certain level of blocked LP funds, which would encourage investors to give liquidity in the name of the increasing value of coins. Additionally, you can copy the idea of ​​your colleague TFLOK to smoke coins when selling, which could also inhibit investors from selling. The third case is a copy of the Solana sabera.so protocol, i.e. liquidation of an unstable loss. I think that introducing these three solutions at the same time will give the appropriate effect, otherwise VKR will lose its value. The introduction of these solutions for the entire team will not be easy, but I think that it is worthwhile additionally when introducing these solutions, VKR could demonstrate an appropriate marketing campaign;)

That’s my opinion, do you agree?

2 Likes

Will need devise method of sustaining buying pressure - people will refuse to hold a token falling in value and capturing little in return. Slashed stacking rewards and disruption of auto compounded Liquidity pairs solved absolutely nothing in relation to token negative price discovery.

negative token price discovery mostly coming from higher inflationary mechanics without support

whale manipulations

in retrospect - Valk can improve token values significantly utilizing lockup mechanics to over time purchase and vault lock valk with options to later vote this liquidity for expansion purposes

another way is collaborative token value - aka does Valkyrie hold a single project token they have advertised for future yields? if answer is no - we must ask the why

2 Likes

Great for price appricatie

Now should be discussions on how to obtain Protocol Owned Liquidity - to supplant protocol into future with its own income generation

2 Likes