We are aware of the various hot topics that some people have raised vocally, and a more permanent record of the responses is available by answering them here. Many items will be repetitive from the previous post, but for those who don’t feel a question or query you had has been addressed you may find it in the deeper details below. Most importantly, this document will provide our community members somewhere they can easily point people to or get answers from if/when certain topics are brought up.
#1 — Money Pot sizes:
In Uranium V1, the first three money pots were ~$240K on day 1, ~$270K on day 2, and ~$380K on day 3. This was good solid growth that was coming predominantly from the 4% deposit fees. These were reasonable money pots and matched the growth.
Now in V2, because of all the hype around the relaunch, supported by a strong community and completed audits we were blessed with rapid, exponential growth, right up to 100M by the end of day 3. This was fantastic in most ways, except that it made the day 1 money pot so large at $850K (and we even capped this), and some people developed unreasonable expectations that those large money pots continue even though the growth had slowed down considerably by day 2.
In the short term, there is no realistic expectation that the future money pots will compare to the initial $2 million distributed back openly and transparently to the community. For us to get back to money pots of that size, we need swap revenues to grow, which will result in more capital choosing to lock into our higher yield 4% farms alongside the swap revenue itself.
For a detailed explanation around the potential platform fees and money pot mechanics, sustaining a $500K daily pot would mean either $16.6M of liquidity deposited daily into the 4% fee pools, or a daily trading volume of ~$416M, or a combination of the two. That’s why even though it’s completely in the realm of possibility, and definitely within our mid to long term goal, we still need people to be patient and maintain reasonable expectations. Rome wasn’t build in a day, and we don’t want to risk any mistakes in the planning, execution, or code itself by rushing our progress.
Details of V2 money pot history:
As previously mentioned, we managed to recover 1.2M in funds after the exploit, and we put the entirety of these funds into the bonus money pot for distribution into the regular money pot for dividend rewards.
- Pot 1 = ~800k distributed from a total of ~1M2 collected from day 1 fees. We kept it high because this initial money pot was both a reward to early V2 investors and to the V1 investors who had waited patiently for a week as the project relaunched. If it wasn’t for the desire to reward those who held their U235 from V1 to V2, we would have capped it lower.
- Pot 2 = ~650k distributed from ~250k collected from day 2 fees +400k left over from the day 1 fees after the cap. Again we kept it this high as when we announced the cap of the 1st pot, we also guaranteed that the following 2 pots would be 500K+
- Pot 3 = ~550k distributed from ~150k collected from day 3 fees, +400k from the bonus money pot which was filled by the recovered funds.
- Pot 4 = ~300k distributed from ~60k collected from day 4 fees, +250k from the bonus money pot.
There is still ~800k of funds remaining in the bonus money pot, including ~500k remaining from the 1M2 recovered funds. That ~500k will be used before the end of the week as stated in our previous article. The remaining ~300k will be distributed over time.
0% farms and ValueDefi:
As explained before, 0% farms are a key of our long term strategy to become a leading AMM. Therefore, more 0% farms will be added over time, with multipliers adjusted accordingly.
There is a lot of misunderstanding about ValueDefi and autofarmers using our 0% farms as people are concerned that their autocompounding of U92 will create constant sell pressure and force the price of U92 down. As mentioned, only ~2.5% of the total emissions of U92 are going to the 0% farms even after taking into account the two new pools that were added, so only a small percentage of that will be autocompounded through ValueDefi.
Whether or not ValueDefi use our platform or not, the same amount of U92 will be distributed to those 0% pools. The more liquidity/people/platforms using those pools just distributes more broadly the rewards within those pools, not for any of the others. Also, we can’t actually stop any person or platform from using our pools once we’ve created them. It is entirely up to ValueDefi and the other platforms if they want to use our pools or not. We are very happy that they are and we hope others join because we need the liquidity and what they can bring us is a huge boon to our platform and pushes us further towards our AMM goal.
Again, we are 100% confident that the amount of trading fees we can generate by having more liquidity will far outweigh the small amount of potential sell pressure from autocompounding on our 0% farms. ValueDefi now expanding and offering innovative U92/U235 pools shows that gains can come to the platform from many levels.
We understand that some people didn’t see why we reset the V2 starting emission rate to 1/block and changed the emission reduction to 3% every 24h with a temporary floor of 0.5/block. So let’s breakdown each piece.
The decision to reset back to 1/block was to provide sufficient APRs especially in non-U92 pools for our launch to compensate existing investors but also bring fresh capital. A lower starting emission rate would have made for lower APRs and liquidity, that fresh 2 million available to the community is directly tied to securing these higher TVLs.
Setting a temporary floor of 0.5/block is only a first milestone. We can reduce it to be lower whenever we want but we can never increase it. We will review our emission rate from time to time and make decisions about reducing it further or not as we approach it, always keeping the community in the loop with the process.
The emission rate of 3% every 24hrs instead of every 12hrs, was and continues to be a tough decision internally. Considering our long term goals, we felt that giving more time for various investors in the initial stage to enter by slowing down the reduction rate was the wiser choice, and provided a more stable earning profile.
It was always the intention to incentivise and reward early investors and farming etc. by having a decreasing emission rate but we also don’t want to make it too difficult for the later investors to get involved.
Of all the concerns we’ve heard, addressing the lack of additional utility of U92 is our #1 priority right now. We are very pleased with the way we’ve created a need for people to buy or farm U92 and then stake it to earn U235, but we are also very aware that we need to create more utility for U92 to reduce the circulating supply and incentivise further buying/holding/staking of it.
We’re already working on a new use case which will greatly help to control the supply and add more funds to the Money Pot. It’s too soon to say more but you won’t have to wait long as we will be releasing it in the next 3–5 days.