[Proposal] [Concluded] Re-structure $TEAK tokenomics and DeFi aspect

Hey there Kangalians,

As you know the work is in progress related to staking and we have recently voted for the configuration parameters that would be applied for staking KANGAL and KANGAL-LPs.

Meanwhile, we have been thinking about the drawbacks of LP staking and were trying to find a solution. Problem is that providing liquidity on 50/50 AMM liquidity pool always has a high impermanent loss risk (except when both are stablecoins). We did come up with one solution that sounded good, but this would only hedge against loss of $TEAK rewards and could not help with the actual impermanent loss. Another important point is we would be giving $TEAK without any economical incentives, which would probably stop the show before it even starts…

The solution we are thinking of currently is expanding the DeFi aspect of the project to be able to properly reward staking which will be changing the roadmap. We would do this via:

Keep KANGAL staking, lower the APR-M and/or increase fees.

Instead of KANGAL-LP staking, add multi-staking (2 or more tokens), KANGAL + USDT, KANGAL + BNB, KANGAL + ETH, KANGAL + USDT + USDC… Then use other yield optimizers to get yield for these. Pay the yield earned + give $TEAK as reward, with more APR-M.

(In future, we could also add LP staking as a riskier option, but for the start, we would be using single token staking from yield optimizers, to have as little risk as possible.)

This way we would be providing a service that actually rewards the stakers without LP risks, and also create a revenue source for the project through fees taken from the yield earnings. As always these fees would be used with the allowance of the holders. Use cases of these funds would include a buyback and burn program for KANGAL and/or $TEAK, platform development, audits, marketing/listing expenses, etc.

What’s next?

  • Let’s talk this through and decide on how to move on with it. We could do a vote for the pivot and the related development. We would first deliver KANGAL staking and then work on multi-staking. This would consequently change the roadmap.
  • If we were to move on with this, KANGAL staking will not be delayed since the work done so far is still compatible with it. We do think we either need to drop APR-M or increase the fees on KANGAL staking though, maybe even both.
4 Likes

Is there a way to set up LP to match what the Bancor protocol does? The “one sided” liquidity is a safer means.

1 Like

Great idea! I would vote on dropping KANGAL-LP and add multi tokens. Our community has to create a revenue stream to continue with future plans and developments, or else the team would be tied up by limited funds and donations.

1 Like

Sounds good to me too. If additional Poll is necessary for this, i’d suggest to start it ASAP, give it 2-3 days, so we don t lose too much time.

1 Like

It is not easy to handle a non 50/50 pool. Pools with different ratios and curves are riskier if you are not doing it for a stable pair. And depth is also very important. On top of that we already have regular pools and arbitrage between those would be devastating.

2 Likes

Sure, it will be more like a vote on approval of overall changes since this will affect the roadmap and general definitions related to “$TEAK is minted only through KANGAL and LP staking”. Will need to update the LP part :slight_smile:

We can give this a day or two and then do the vote. And no worries, this is not slowing the work since we are still going to use what we have built so far for KANGAL staking.

Ok I understand. Just a thought. Keep up the great work

1 Like

Hey everyone, so here is what will be in the proposal:

  • Keep KANGAL staking with the same APR-M, remove the fee for claiming $TEAK, and limit minting $TEAK to this pool. To use in future staking pools with multi-stake, mint same amount for DAO treasury with each claim. So if the user who stakes KANGAL claims 1M $TEAK as reward, we also mint 1M for treasury to use in all future operations. This means the only way to mint new $TEAK will be staking KANGAL, and other pools will just use the already minted $TEAK. As you know any project treasury is in the control of the community via DAO.

  • Skip LP pools and work on multi-stake pools in the future.

  • Update website, docs, litepaper, whitepaper in alignment with the overall changes.

  • Allow dev team to use funds from the treasury for audits. We currently have ~1.8 ETH there, and we may need all of it so there will be no fixed amount in the proposal.


What do you think fam? Anything we may have missed here?

2 Likes

Vote on ETH side:
https://snapshot.org/#/kangal.eth/proposal/QmaaFbFKKfCsqkGvkLNNUm5e1cedVQfxWxezEFDBvzbj6f

Vote on BSC side:
https://snapshot.org/#/kangal-bsc.eth/proposal/QmPJooT9JpdhnmuXZ5dCumUmMU4G9NQxbBXioEsye91Qxr

1 Like

Results are in, and the proposal has passed!

We will keep working in accordance with this result and also update all of the related docs to reflect the changes.

Thank you for your support, gang!

Excited about the work you devs and community are putting in on Kangal. I’m a believer in soaking as a passive income and as a means to provide stability for the project.

2 Likes