I, Michael Egorov, founder of Curve, requests the Arbitrum DAO to match my donation of 237'500 ARB tokens. The Total of 475'000 ARB tokens will support the launch of new Curve lending markets on Arbitrum One.
Curve lending introduces a unique feature called soft-liquidation. Instead of losing collateral below loan to value instantly, the position enters a soft-liquidation state. If the asset's price rebounds, the soft-liquidation is reversed, allowing users to retain their collateral.
When setting up a loan, users can customize their soft-liquidation range based on their own risk tolerance. Full liquidation of collateral only happens if the price falls below this predetermined range.
The goal of this proposal is to establish a deeply liquid borrowing and lending market for ARB tokens. The funds matched by the Arbitrum DAO will be used exclusively to bootstrap the supply side of the ARB markets.
Curve lending needs for the soft-liquidation deep curve pools, the ARB donated by Michael Egorov will be used to incentivize the crvUSD/CRV/ARB pool and upcoming LRT/WETH AMM pools on arbitrum.
We see Arbitrum as a perfect place to start spinning up curve lending on L2. Regardless of the outcome of this proposal, Michael Egorov will us his ARB to incentivize curve on Arbitrum.
LlamaRisk
Curve Finance
Curve is a multichain AMM exchange that specializes in low slippage stablecoin swaps and concentrated liquidity provision. Curve distinguishes itself as the primary liquidity hub for some of the most exciting DeFi innovations, including stablecoins, Liquid Staking Tokens, and Real World Assets. In 2023 Curve has launched its own stablecoin, crvUSD, and now in 2024 is launching Curve Lending, an isolated lending market with soft-liquidation.
Founded in 2021, LlamaRisk emerged as a trusted service provider to Curve and its liquidity providers, offering nuanced risk analysis for a spectrum of assets on Curve such as stablecoins, RWAs (Real World Assets) and LSTs (Liquid Staking Tokens). The diverse team encompasses experts from research, analysis, economics, data science, smart contract development, and legal fields. While operating independently, LlamaRisk is committed to further supporting Curve Lending through advanced simulation and meticulous risk monitoring services. The group boast a collaborative history with both the Curve team and Curve DAO. LlamaRisk members successfully represented the DAO in securing other grants for Curve.
Michael Egorov is the founder and lead developer of Curve. He is the person behind curve stabelswap, crvUSD and lending. His latest invention is the algorithm for soft-liquidation which is used in crvUSD and Curve Lending.
Martin Krung is Curve core contributor and coordinates this grant request on behave of Michael Egorov and LlamaRisk.
Twitter: https://twitter.com/LlamaRisk Email: [email protected]
TG: @martinkrung Twitter: https://twitter.com/martinkrung Email: [email protected]
LlamaRisk consents to mandatory KYC checks for the purpose of grant application.
Curve lending introduces a unique feature called soft-liquidation. Instead of losing collateral below loan to value instantly, the position enters a soft-liquidation state. If the asset's price rebounds, the soft-liquidation is reversed, allowing users to retain their collateral.
When setting up a loan, users can customize their soft-liquidation range based on their own risk tolerance. Full liquidation of collateral only happens if the price falls below this predetermined range.
A deep dive how curve lending works: https://cryptorisks.substack.com/p/a-primer-on-curve-lending
Curve lending contracts are deployed on Arbitrum on 24.March 2024. Front-End is aviable since End of March.
Currently no Lending Market to Borrow ARB with crvUSD exists
No, Curve is native to Ethereum and has deployed on 12 other chains and L2s. Arbitrum istthe first L2 where the lending market is rolled out.
As per DefiLlama on March 22th, 2024:
| Arbitrum | $117m |
|---|---|
| Ethereum | $2.29b |
| Polygon | $25.66m |
| Celo | $20.67m |
| Gnosis | $10.76m |
| Optimism | $6.41m |
| Avalanche | $4.19m |
| Kava | $3.02m |
| Base | $2.93m |
| Fantom | $2.14m |
| Moonbeam | $107,677 |
| Aurora | $17,238 |
Source: curve.fi (Arbitrum Numbers) and https://defillama.com/protocol/curve-finance
Curve, the AMM, has been deployed on September 12th, 2021 Curve lending has been deployed on March 24th, 2024
Yes, Curve DAO has CRV as native token which is, as veCRV a) governance token b) a fee sharing token. More details here: https://resources.curve.fi/crv-token/crv-basics/
Curve DAO got 3,476,795 ARB from the initial distribution and is currently using this funds to incentivize some pools.
Only the initial distribution, see above.
As per DefiLlama on March 22th, 2024
TVL: $2.444b Cumulative Revenue: 298.01m Cumulative Admin Fees Paid to LPs: $142.93m Cumulative Volume: $133b (average $228M/day)
Source: https://defillama.com/protocol/curve-finance
A report by Delphi Digital released in July 2022 pulled data from every trade on the ETH/USDT pair on both Curve Tricrypto and Uniswap and simulated every trade on the opposite venue. It found that price quotes were better on Curve 65% of the time, although it only captured 35% of the volume. This was attributable to the higher gas cost of the more complex Curve pool.
When running the same test on Arbitrum, the "ideal" volume matched the actual volume much more closely, suggesting that Curve performs much better on a cheap gas platform like Arbitrum.
Not only does Curve have the capacity to offer superior trade execution on L2s like Arbitrum, it offers a superior experience for LPs. Curve uses an internal price oracle and dynamic fees, only updating the price scale if losses from re-pegging are made up for by at least half of the pool profits from fees. While the complex logic makes Curve V2 pools less competitive on mainnet, it is a truly automated market maker designed to protect LPs from erosion of their supplied value through impermanent loss.
As an established protocol Curves roadmap is all about make things work better, improve the existing products and make integration more seemless. Better L2 integration and cross-chain crvUSD adoption is important for Curve.
Curve non-rehypothecation isolated lending markets are our first step, but lending markets with rehypothecation are a possible next one.
Audits for Curve Lending have been done and findings integrated, but they are not yet public.
Curve lending is currently deployed on ethereum mainnet which shows our high confidence in the security of the code.
Curve has been heavily audited. The crvUSD protocol underwent a comprehensive audit by 3 separate audit firms before launch. Every upgrade to the Curve protocol involves audits as part of standard security practice.
A list of Curve audit reports can be found here. Also, see a crvUSD specific audit by Mixbytes.
We have a bug bounty program: https://classic.curve.fi/bugbounty
On July 30 2024 a vyper compile bug affected curve pools which have been compiled with the affected version. Part of the lost funds have been recoverd, the rest has been payed back from the Curve DAO treasury.
Post Mortem Report: https://hackmd.io/@LlamaRisk/BJzSKHNjn Recompensation post: https://gov.curve.fi/t/proposal-to-recompensate-lps-affected-by-curve-pool-exploit/9825
237'500 ARB
Michael Egorov will donated 237'500 ARB from his personal ownership to match the arbitrum grant. The source of these tokens are from early personal investment into Arbitrum.
The goal of this proposal is to establish a deeply liquid borrowing and lending market for ARB tokens. The funds matched by the Arbitrum DAO will be used exclusively to bootstrap the supply side in the two ARB markets. The funds from Micheal Egorov are used for the crvUSD/ARB/CRV pool and upcoming LRT/WETH AMM pools. Possible LRT tokens are weETH (ether.fi), ezETH (Renzo) and reETH (KelpDAO), which have decent liquidity on arbitrum.
| Amount | Type | Market/Pool | Target TVL |
|---|---|---|---|
| 213'750 ARB | Lending Market | Borrow crvUSD with ARB | $6m |
| 23'750 ARB | Lending Market | Borrow ARB with crvUSD | $2m |
| 147'500 ARB | AMM Pool | crvUSD/ARB/CRV pool | $5m |
| 90'000 ARB | AMM Pool | 3 * LRT/WETH pools | $3m / $1m per pool |
| 475,000 ARB | $16m |
The ARB will be deployed to the market/pool rewards as a supply incentive and direct LP incentive.
Once funds have been received, we will work with the Curve core team to deploy the grant. Distribution will begin shortly after the necessary markets have been deployed.
The Multisig Address controlled by LlamaRisk: https://arbiscan.io/address/0xa6A7020B3276e86011a33638F3CD8fe02d5E4b61
Micheal Egorov will sends his donation of 237'500 ARB to the same address the day before the vote starts. The transaction will be posted in this proposal as well to update the community.
The ARB Grant will vest linearly over the 16 weeks — and the stream can be stopped at any time by the oversight committee.
2/3 Multisig with keys from LlamaRisk members: https://app.safe.global/home?safe=arb1:0xa6A7020B3276e86011a33638F3CD8fe02d5E4b61
with this signers
0x84bC1fC6204b959470BF8A00d871ff8988a3914A 0x49cE85E1c55cb5b41b8Da2Db85826E3b63A47E00 0x462FcBb0581354263061e8dCF5e27C5B5E8Ce3b3
As this is a private initiative of Micheal Egorov and for the best outcome complex transactions are needed, a standard multisig will be used.
The size of the grant is based on the ARB donation from my side.
The ~8 M TVL target for the lending markets and the 8 M TVL target for AMM pools are a good size in this market environment. The target APY seems high, but in the current market with many opportunities, the incentivization is need to attract capital in this lending markets. As we don't want to overpay, we adjust the amount of incentive every 2 weeks according to success to attract liquidity.
The goal of this proposal is to establish a deeply liquid borrow and lending market for ARB tokens. The novel soft-liquidation protects all users according to their risk appetite and helps to avoid liquidations.
Soft-liquidation allows users to set a liquidation level close to the market price and leads to a more capital efficient way of using collateral.
Soft-liquidation is done over arbitrage with liquidity venues for ARB on Arbitrum. A deep crvUSD/ARB liquidity pool on Curve allows it to work smooth. The low gas fee on Arbitrum allows for more efficient soft-liquidation, as the arbitrageur doing the soft-liquidation has less gas cost to cover than on mainnet.
Latest developments showed that LRT needs deeper liquidity to be traded to absorbe rough market conditions. This is why some ARB will be used to bootstrap LRT/WETH pools, possible LRT tokens are weETH (ether.fi), ezETH (Renzo) and reETH (KelpDAO), which have decent liquidity on arbitrum.
A short-term incentive program runs the risk of seeing mass liquidity outflows after incentives end. Our goal is to jumpstart ARB lending market. As the soft-liquidation is far superior to the hard liquidation used in other lending markets, we are convinced users keep using the lending market if the incentive is tapering off.
As we incentivize the supply side, the supply side earns lending reward from borrowers on top of the supply during bootstrapping and after bootstrapping.
veCRV stakeholders will be motivated to continue allocating CRV emissions toward lending markets even after the ARB incentives end. CRV's emission schedule lasts hundreds of years, giving Curve the means to incentivize liquidity on Arbitrum for years to come.
The funds matched by the Arbitrum DAO will be used exclusively to bootstrap the supply side in the two ARB markets. The funds from Micheal Egorov are used for the crvUSD/ARB/CRV pool and upcoming LRT/WETH AMM pools. Possible LRT tokens are weETH (ether.fi), ezETH (Renzo) and reETH (KelpDAO), which have decent liquidity on arbitrum.
| Amount | Type | Market/Pool | Target TVL |
|---|---|---|---|
| 213'750 ARB | Lending Market | Borrow crvUSD with ARB | $6m |
| 23'750 ARB | Lending Market | Borrow ARB with crvUSD | $2m |
| 147'500 ARB | AMM Pool | crvUSD/ARB/CRV pool | $5m |
| 3 * 30'000 ARB | 3 * AMM Pools | 3 * LRT/WETH pools | $3m / $1m per pool |
| 475,000 ARB | $16m |
Fixed is the total amount of ARB.
Experience made on other incentivization programs taught us to adjust numbers during the program to achieve the best capital efficiencies.
On a similar program with Sturdy, an isolated lending market with shared liquidity, we have been running for crvUSD adoption, showed us that discovering new opportunity and products during a bull market needs time and over incentivization should be avoided.
It's good to start with high APY, but if attracted TVL stays low and APY high, then the amount ARB spend should be lowered and rolled over to the next epoch. This is way epoch is set to 2 weeks, which results in adjustments made bi-weekly.
Another varying number in lending markets are how much native yield can be attracted, if curve lending markets are in demand and native yield is high, then less ARB can be spent and rolled over.
If after some time no usage of the market to borrow ARB with crvUSD is achieved, we shift to a target yield of 5% or less, to not over incentive idle capital.
The TVL attracted and the resulting APY will be determined by market sentiment and ARB price.
The minimal run time will be 16 weeks. Run time will be maximally extended to 20 weeks, if unnecessary high APY is achieved, the distribution rate will be decreases and funds last longer.
The 237'500 ARB from the Arbitrum DAO Grant the supply Asset will be incentivized and help to establish a deep liquid ARB lending market with soft-liquidation.
| Market | Incentive | Collateral | Borrowable | Supply Asset |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Borrow crvUSD with ARB | 213'750 ARB | ARB | crvUSD | crvUSD |
| Borrow ARB with crvUSD | 23'750 ARB | crvUSD | ARB | ARB |
We suggest starting with the use of 9/10 of the ARB to attract crvUSD supply and 1/10 of the ARB to attract ARB supply. In the current market environment, there is more demand for leverage by depositing ARB as collateral and borrow crvUSD, than the opposite. Depending on the usage of these, the market's ratio may shift from epoch to epoch. If after some time no usage of the market to borrow ARB with crvUSD is achieved, we shift to a target yield of 5% or less to not over incentive idle capital.
Depending on the market situation at launch and each epoch, numbers may be adjusted over time.
Source of this screenshots: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/10B_fNA7HWXlC1GrrOA_y8bJsSpXmSaHVPcEAW4xoD80/edit?usp=sharing
The 237'500 ARB from Curve's founder will be used to incentivize and help to establish deep liquidity for the crvUSD/CRV/ARB pool and upcoming LRT/WETH AMM pools. Possible LRT tokens are weTHE (ether.fi), ezTEH (Renzo) and reETH (KelpDAO), which have decent liquidity on arbitrum.
| Pool | Incentive |
|---|---|
| crvUSD/ARB/CRV | 147'500 ARB |
| 3 * LRT/WETH pools | 90'000 ARB / 30'000 ARB per pool |
Depending on the market situation at launch and each epoch, numbers may be adjusted over time.
Curve is the backbone of the burgeoning DeFi industry. It touches every piece of the stack and strengthens every integrated protocol. There is an opportunity for Arbitrum to leverage Curve’s foundational role to further support its vibrant ecosystem. Examples of how Curve spurs DeFi integration include:
After bootstrapping curve lending markets, part of the supplied asset will be borrowed to users which pay a market rate. The achieved native yield depends on the market size and usage, and we expect this to be substantial to retain supplied assets after the incentivization period.
The projected timeline is as follows:
To measure the success of this grant, we will use the following key performance indicators:
Set range for a single curve lending positions can be seen over the lending page on curve, an aggreagted view of all positions is also available. (See product screenshot above)
We have a dashboard for all things curve, soon we will have two person working full time on this. We will integrate the lending market and improve general data representation: https://www.curvemonitor.com
Lendig market are integrated with defillama.com: https://defillama.com/protocol/curve-llamalend
For crvUSD we have this dashboard: https://community.chaoslabs.xyz/crv-usd/risk/overview
Numbers will be published in the forum after the bi-weekly adjustment.
A final report how the funds have been used will be provided in the forum and show how KPI have evolved.
If you have questions or ideas how to improve this proposal, please comment.
Curve's matching contribution of 237,500 donated by Michael Egorov has partly already commenced, to this date, 168'000 ARB has being distributed directly in the following lending markets: ARB/crvUSD, WETH/crvUSD, WBTC/crvUSD, CRV/crvUSD. They helped to bootstramp curve lending.
Upon successful passing of this vote, the remaining, 69,500 ARB undistributed funds will be deposited into the multisig.
During the incentive, Michael Egorov will add his monthly vested 19,791 ARB on top of the pledged 237,500 ARB.
LlamaRisk will coordinate with LTIPP council to ensure any data reporting requirements and compliance requirements of LTIPP are followed
I, Michael Egorov, founder of Curve, requests the Arbitrum DAO to match my donation of 237'500 ARB tokens. The Total of 475'000 ARB tokens will support the launch of new Curve lending markets on Arbitrum One.
Curve lending introduces a unique feature called soft-liquidation. Instead of losing collateral below loan to value instantly, the position enters a soft-liquidation state. If the asset's price rebounds, the soft-liquidation is reversed, allowing users to retain their collateral.
When setting up a loan, users can customize their soft-liquidation range based on their own risk tolerance. Full liquidation of collateral only happens if the price falls below this predetermined range.
The goal of this proposal is to establish a deeply liquid borrowing and lending market for ARB tokens. The funds matched by the Arbitrum DAO will be used exclusively to bootstrap the supply side of the ARB markets.
Curve lending needs for the soft-liquidation deep curve pools, the ARB donated by Michael Egorov will be used to incentivize the crvUSD/CRV/ARB pool and upcoming LRT/WETH AMM pools on arbitrum.
We see Arbitrum as a perfect place to start spinning up curve lending on L2. Regardless of the outcome of this proposal, Michael Egorov will us his ARB to incentivize curve on Arbitrum.
LlamaRisk
Curve Finance
Curve is a multichain AMM exchange that specializes in low slippage stablecoin swaps and concentrated liquidity provision. Curve distinguishes itself as the primary liquidity hub for some of the most exciting DeFi innovations, including stablecoins, Liquid Staking Tokens, and Real World Assets. In 2023 Curve has launched its own stablecoin, crvUSD, and now in 2024 is launching Curve Lending, an isolated lending market with soft-liquidation.
Founded in 2021, LlamaRisk emerged as a trusted service provider to Curve and its liquidity providers, offering nuanced risk analysis for a spectrum of assets on Curve such as stablecoins, RWAs (Real World Assets) and LSTs (Liquid Staking Tokens). The diverse team encompasses experts from research, analysis, economics, data science, smart contract development, and legal fields. While operating independently, LlamaRisk is committed to further supporting Curve Lending through advanced simulation and meticulous risk monitoring services. The group boast a collaborative history with both the Curve team and Curve DAO. LlamaRisk members successfully represented the DAO in securing other grants for Curve.
Michael Egorov is the founder and lead developer of Curve. He is the person behind curve stabelswap, crvUSD and lending. His latest invention is the algorithm for soft-liquidation which is used in crvUSD and Curve Lending.
Martin Krung is Curve core contributor and coordinates this grant request on behave of Michael Egorov and LlamaRisk.
Twitter: https://twitter.com/LlamaRisk Email: [email protected]
TG: @martinkrung Twitter: https://twitter.com/martinkrung Email: [email protected]
LlamaRisk consents to mandatory KYC checks for the purpose of grant application.
Curve lending introduces a unique feature called soft-liquidation. Instead of losing collateral below loan to value instantly, the position enters a soft-liquidation state. If the asset's price rebounds, the soft-liquidation is reversed, allowing users to retain their collateral.
When setting up a loan, users can customize their soft-liquidation range based on their own risk tolerance. Full liquidation of collateral only happens if the price falls below this predetermined range.
A deep dive how curve lending works: https://cryptorisks.substack.com/p/a-primer-on-curve-lending
Curve lending contracts are deployed on Arbitrum on 24.March 2024. Front-End is aviable since End of March.
Currently no Lending Market to Borrow ARB with crvUSD exists
No, Curve is native to Ethereum and has deployed on 12 other chains and L2s. Arbitrum istthe first L2 where the lending market is rolled out.
As per DefiLlama on March 22th, 2024:
| Arbitrum | $117m |
|---|---|
| Ethereum | $2.29b |
| Polygon | $25.66m |
| Celo | $20.67m |
| Gnosis | $10.76m |
| Optimism | $6.41m |
| Avalanche | $4.19m |
| Kava | $3.02m |
| Base | $2.93m |
| Fantom | $2.14m |
| Moonbeam | $107,677 |
| Aurora | $17,238 |
Source: curve.fi (Arbitrum Numbers) and https://defillama.com/protocol/curve-finance
Curve, the AMM, has been deployed on September 12th, 2021 Curve lending has been deployed on March 24th, 2024
Yes, Curve DAO has CRV as native token which is, as veCRV a) governance token b) a fee sharing token. More details here: https://resources.curve.fi/crv-token/crv-basics/
Curve DAO got 3,476,795 ARB from the initial distribution and is currently using this funds to incentivize some pools.
Only the initial distribution, see above.
As per DefiLlama on March 22th, 2024
TVL: $2.444b Cumulative Revenue: 298.01m Cumulative Admin Fees Paid to LPs: $142.93m Cumulative Volume: $133b (average $228M/day)
Source: https://defillama.com/protocol/curve-finance
A report by Delphi Digital released in July 2022 pulled data from every trade on the ETH/USDT pair on both Curve Tricrypto and Uniswap and simulated every trade on the opposite venue. It found that price quotes were better on Curve 65% of the time, although it only captured 35% of the volume. This was attributable to the higher gas cost of the more complex Curve pool.
When running the same test on Arbitrum, the "ideal" volume matched the actual volume much more closely, suggesting that Curve performs much better on a cheap gas platform like Arbitrum.
Not only does Curve have the capacity to offer superior trade execution on L2s like Arbitrum, it offers a superior experience for LPs. Curve uses an internal price oracle and dynamic fees, only updating the price scale if losses from re-pegging are made up for by at least half of the pool profits from fees. While the complex logic makes Curve V2 pools less competitive on mainnet, it is a truly automated market maker designed to protect LPs from erosion of their supplied value through impermanent loss.
As an established protocol Curves roadmap is all about make things work better, improve the existing products and make integration more seemless. Better L2 integration and cross-chain crvUSD adoption is important for Curve.
Curve non-rehypothecation isolated lending markets are our first step, but lending markets with rehypothecation are a possible next one.
Audits for Curve Lending have been done and findings integrated, but they are not yet public.
Curve lending is currently deployed on ethereum mainnet which shows our high confidence in the security of the code.
Curve has been heavily audited. The crvUSD protocol underwent a comprehensive audit by 3 separate audit firms before launch. Every upgrade to the Curve protocol involves audits as part of standard security practice.
A list of Curve audit reports can be found here. Also, see a crvUSD specific audit by Mixbytes.
We have a bug bounty program: https://classic.curve.fi/bugbounty
On July 30 2024 a vyper compile bug affected curve pools which have been compiled with the affected version. Part of the lost funds have been recoverd, the rest has been payed back from the Curve DAO treasury.
Post Mortem Report: https://hackmd.io/@LlamaRisk/BJzSKHNjn Recompensation post: https://gov.curve.fi/t/proposal-to-recompensate-lps-affected-by-curve-pool-exploit/9825
237'500 ARB
Michael Egorov will donated 237'500 ARB from his personal ownership to match the arbitrum grant. The source of these tokens are from early personal investment into Arbitrum.
The goal of this proposal is to establish a deeply liquid borrowing and lending market for ARB tokens. The funds matched by the Arbitrum DAO will be used exclusively to bootstrap the supply side in the two ARB markets. The funds from Micheal Egorov are used for the crvUSD/ARB/CRV pool and upcoming LRT/WETH AMM pools. Possible LRT tokens are weETH (ether.fi), ezETH (Renzo) and reETH (KelpDAO), which have decent liquidity on arbitrum.
| Amount | Type | Market/Pool | Target TVL |
|---|---|---|---|
| 213'750 ARB | Lending Market | Borrow crvUSD with ARB | $6m |
| 23'750 ARB | Lending Market | Borrow ARB with crvUSD | $2m |
| 147'500 ARB | AMM Pool | crvUSD/ARB/CRV pool | $5m |
| 90'000 ARB | AMM Pool | 3 * LRT/WETH pools | $3m / $1m per pool |
| 475,000 ARB | $16m |
The ARB will be deployed to the market/pool rewards as a supply incentive and direct LP incentive.
Once funds have been received, we will work with the Curve core team to deploy the grant. Distribution will begin shortly after the necessary markets have been deployed.
The Multisig Address controlled by LlamaRisk: https://arbiscan.io/address/0xa6A7020B3276e86011a33638F3CD8fe02d5E4b61
Micheal Egorov will sends his donation of 237'500 ARB to the same address the day before the vote starts. The transaction will be posted in this proposal as well to update the community.
The ARB Grant will vest linearly over the 16 weeks — and the stream can be stopped at any time by the oversight committee.
2/3 Multisig with keys from LlamaRisk members: https://app.safe.global/home?safe=arb1:0xa6A7020B3276e86011a33638F3CD8fe02d5E4b61
with this signers
0x84bC1fC6204b959470BF8A00d871ff8988a3914A 0x49cE85E1c55cb5b41b8Da2Db85826E3b63A47E00 0x462FcBb0581354263061e8dCF5e27C5B5E8Ce3b3
As this is a private initiative of Micheal Egorov and for the best outcome complex transactions are needed, a standard multisig will be used.
The size of the grant is based on the ARB donation from my side.
The ~8 M TVL target for the lending markets and the 8 M TVL target for AMM pools are a good size in this market environment. The target APY seems high, but in the current market with many opportunities, the incentivization is need to attract capital in this lending markets. As we don't want to overpay, we adjust the amount of incentive every 2 weeks according to success to attract liquidity.
The goal of this proposal is to establish a deeply liquid borrow and lending market for ARB tokens. The novel soft-liquidation protects all users according to their risk appetite and helps to avoid liquidations.
Soft-liquidation allows users to set a liquidation level close to the market price and leads to a more capital efficient way of using collateral.
Soft-liquidation is done over arbitrage with liquidity venues for ARB on Arbitrum. A deep crvUSD/ARB liquidity pool on Curve allows it to work smooth. The low gas fee on Arbitrum allows for more efficient soft-liquidation, as the arbitrageur doing the soft-liquidation has less gas cost to cover than on mainnet.
Latest developments showed that LRT needs deeper liquidity to be traded to absorbe rough market conditions. This is why some ARB will be used to bootstrap LRT/WETH pools, possible LRT tokens are weETH (ether.fi), ezETH (Renzo) and reETH (KelpDAO), which have decent liquidity on arbitrum.
A short-term incentive program runs the risk of seeing mass liquidity outflows after incentives end. Our goal is to jumpstart ARB lending market. As the soft-liquidation is far superior to the hard liquidation used in other lending markets, we are convinced users keep using the lending market if the incentive is tapering off.
As we incentivize the supply side, the supply side earns lending reward from borrowers on top of the supply during bootstrapping and after bootstrapping.
veCRV stakeholders will be motivated to continue allocating CRV emissions toward lending markets even after the ARB incentives end. CRV's emission schedule lasts hundreds of years, giving Curve the means to incentivize liquidity on Arbitrum for years to come.
The funds matched by the Arbitrum DAO will be used exclusively to bootstrap the supply side in the two ARB markets. The funds from Micheal Egorov are used for the crvUSD/ARB/CRV pool and upcoming LRT/WETH AMM pools. Possible LRT tokens are weETH (ether.fi), ezETH (Renzo) and reETH (KelpDAO), which have decent liquidity on arbitrum.
| Amount | Type | Market/Pool | Target TVL |
|---|---|---|---|
| 213'750 ARB | Lending Market | Borrow crvUSD with ARB | $6m |
| 23'750 ARB | Lending Market | Borrow ARB with crvUSD | $2m |
| 147'500 ARB | AMM Pool | crvUSD/ARB/CRV pool | $5m |
| 3 * 30'000 ARB | 3 * AMM Pools | 3 * LRT/WETH pools | $3m / $1m per pool |
| 475,000 ARB | $16m |
Fixed is the total amount of ARB.
Experience made on other incentivization programs taught us to adjust numbers during the program to achieve the best capital efficiencies.
On a similar program with Sturdy, an isolated lending market with shared liquidity, we have been running for crvUSD adoption, showed us that discovering new opportunity and products during a bull market needs time and over incentivization should be avoided.
It's good to start with high APY, but if attracted TVL stays low and APY high, then the amount ARB spend should be lowered and rolled over to the next epoch. This is way epoch is set to 2 weeks, which results in adjustments made bi-weekly.
Another varying number in lending markets are how much native yield can be attracted, if curve lending markets are in demand and native yield is high, then less ARB can be spent and rolled over.
If after some time no usage of the market to borrow ARB with crvUSD is achieved, we shift to a target yield of 5% or less, to not over incentive idle capital.
The TVL attracted and the resulting APY will be determined by market sentiment and ARB price.
The minimal run time will be 16 weeks. Run time will be maximally extended to 20 weeks, if unnecessary high APY is achieved, the distribution rate will be decreases and funds last longer.
The 237'500 ARB from the Arbitrum DAO Grant the supply Asset will be incentivized and help to establish a deep liquid ARB lending market with soft-liquidation.
| Market | Incentive | Collateral | Borrowable | Supply Asset |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Borrow crvUSD with ARB | 213'750 ARB | ARB | crvUSD | crvUSD |
| Borrow ARB with crvUSD | 23'750 ARB | crvUSD | ARB | ARB |
We suggest starting with the use of 9/10 of the ARB to attract crvUSD supply and 1/10 of the ARB to attract ARB supply. In the current market environment, there is more demand for leverage by depositing ARB as collateral and borrow crvUSD, than the opposite. Depending on the usage of these, the market's ratio may shift from epoch to epoch. If after some time no usage of the market to borrow ARB with crvUSD is achieved, we shift to a target yield of 5% or less to not over incentive idle capital.
Depending on the market situation at launch and each epoch, numbers may be adjusted over time.
Source of this screenshots: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/10B_fNA7HWXlC1GrrOA_y8bJsSpXmSaHVPcEAW4xoD80/edit?usp=sharing
The 237'500 ARB from Curve's founder will be used to incentivize and help to establish deep liquidity for the crvUSD/CRV/ARB pool and upcoming LRT/WETH AMM pools. Possible LRT tokens are weTHE (ether.fi), ezTEH (Renzo) and reETH (KelpDAO), which have decent liquidity on arbitrum.
| Pool | Incentive |
|---|---|
| crvUSD/ARB/CRV | 147'500 ARB |
| 3 * LRT/WETH pools | 90'000 ARB / 30'000 ARB per pool |
Depending on the market situation at launch and each epoch, numbers may be adjusted over time.
Curve is the backbone of the burgeoning DeFi industry. It touches every piece of the stack and strengthens every integrated protocol. There is an opportunity for Arbitrum to leverage Curve’s foundational role to further support its vibrant ecosystem. Examples of how Curve spurs DeFi integration include:
After bootstrapping curve lending markets, part of the supplied asset will be borrowed to users which pay a market rate. The achieved native yield depends on the market size and usage, and we expect this to be substantial to retain supplied assets after the incentivization period.
The projected timeline is as follows:
To measure the success of this grant, we will use the following key performance indicators:
Set range for a single curve lending positions can be seen over the lending page on curve, an aggreagted view of all positions is also available. (See product screenshot above)
We have a dashboard for all things curve, soon we will have two person working full time on this. We will integrate the lending market and improve general data representation: https://www.curvemonitor.com
Lendig market are integrated with defillama.com: https://defillama.com/protocol/curve-llamalend
For crvUSD we have this dashboard: https://community.chaoslabs.xyz/crv-usd/risk/overview
Numbers will be published in the forum after the bi-weekly adjustment.
A final report how the funds have been used will be provided in the forum and show how KPI have evolved.
If you have questions or ideas how to improve this proposal, please comment.
Curve's matching contribution of 237,500 donated by Michael Egorov has partly already commenced, to this date, 168'000 ARB has being distributed directly in the following lending markets: ARB/crvUSD, WETH/crvUSD, WBTC/crvUSD, CRV/crvUSD. They helped to bootstramp curve lending.
Upon successful passing of this vote, the remaining, 69,500 ARB undistributed funds will be deposited into the multisig.
During the incentive, Michael Egorov will add his monthly vested 19,791 ARB on top of the pledged 237,500 ARB.
LlamaRisk will coordinate with LTIPP council to ensure any data reporting requirements and compliance requirements of LTIPP are followed
this proposal could set precedence for other big projects to come request grants separate from already laid down procedure
https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/larva-delegate-communication-thread/24476?u=larva
https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/proposal-request-to-match-my-donation-to-boostrap-curve-lending-on-arbitrum/22975/44?u=mcfly
this proposal could set precedence for other big projects to come request grants separate from already laid down procedure
https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/larva-delegate-communication-thread/24476?u=larva
https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/proposal-request-to-match-my-donation-to-boostrap-curve-lending-on-arbitrum/22975/44?u=mcfly
https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/proposal-request-to-match-my-donation-to-boostrap-curve-lending-on-arbitrum/22975/43?u=tane
https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/proposal-request-to-match-my-donation-to-boostrap-curve-lending-on-arbitrum/22975/42?u=blockworksresearch
https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/proposal-request-to-match-my-donation-to-boostrap-curve-lending-on-arbitrum/22975/24
When ARB is distributed as rewards to markets and pools, it has two benefits: 1. **Increased Market Liquidity:** This will attract more people to participate in the market, improving trading efficiency and making transactions cheaper and faster. 2. **Incentivizing Ecosystem Development:** Directly rewarding liquidity providers will encourage more participation in the project, driving its growth and establishing a healthier, more prosperous ecosystem.
We do not encourage grants to begin going directly through Arbitrum governance. However, this is a request to match funds already being provided for a program that is on Arbitrum. The requested size is also modest, making it easier to approve.
https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/proposal-request-to-match-my-donation-to-boostrap-curve-lending-on-arbitrum/22975/18?u=0x_ultra
https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/proposal-request-to-match-my-donation-to-boostrap-curve-lending-on-arbitrum/22975/16?u=jojo
https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/proposal-request-to-match-my-donation-to-boostrap-curve-lending-on-arbitrum/22975/38?u=princetonblockchain
Curve is a leading DeFi protocol and having another item of its suit (lending) on Arbitrum is an enhancement for our DeFi Ecosystem.
https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/proposal-request-to-match-my-donation-to-boostrap-curve-lending-on-arbitrum/22975/36?u=ocandocrypto
We support this project due to its liquidation innovation in lending
https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/proposal-request-to-match-my-donation-to-boostrap-curve-lending-on-arbitrum/22975/31
https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/proposal-request-to-match-my-donation-to-boostrap-curve-lending-on-arbitrum/22975/30?u=blockworksresearc
https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/proposal-request-to-match-my-donation-to-boostrap-curve-lending-on-arbitrum/22975/29?u=maxlomu
Curve is a leading DeFi protocol and having another item of its suit on Arbitrum is an enhancement for our DeFi Ecosystem.
https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/proposal-request-to-match-my-donation-to-boostrap-curve-lending-on-arbitrum/22975/25?u=cattin
https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/proposal-request-to-match-my-donation-to-boostrap-curve-lending-on-arbitrum/22975/24?u=bob-rossi
Love to see them putting up their own money! I just hope they can pass KYC :-D
https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/proposal-request-to-match-my-donation-to-boostrap-curve-lending-on-arbitrum/22975/23?u=itublockchain
FOR: https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/proposal-request-to-match-my-donation-to-boostrap-curve-lending-on-arbitrum/22975/22?u=savvydao
https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/proposal-request-to-match-my-donation-to-boostrap-curve-lending-on-arbitrum/22975/20?u=ocandocrypto
https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/proposal-request-to-match-my-donation-to-boostrap-curve-lending-on-arbitrum/22975/18?u=0x_ultra
https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/proposal-request-to-match-my-donation-to-boostrap-curve-lending-on-arbitrum/22975/17?u=mcfly
https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/proposal-request-to-match-my-donation-to-boostrap-curve-lending-on-arbitrum/22975/16?u=jojo
Curve Finance, il re dello swap di stablecoin.
cp0x fully supports this project due to its liquidation innovation in lending
https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/proposal-request-to-match-my-donation-to-boostrap-curve-lending-on-arbitrum/22975/43?u=tane
https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/proposal-request-to-match-my-donation-to-boostrap-curve-lending-on-arbitrum/22975/42?u=blockworksresearch
https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/proposal-request-to-match-my-donation-to-boostrap-curve-lending-on-arbitrum/22975/24
When ARB is distributed as rewards to markets and pools, it has two benefits: 1. **Increased Market Liquidity:** This will attract more people to participate in the market, improving trading efficiency and making transactions cheaper and faster. 2. **Incentivizing Ecosystem Development:** Directly rewarding liquidity providers will encourage more participation in the project, driving its growth and establishing a healthier, more prosperous ecosystem.
We do not encourage grants to begin going directly through Arbitrum governance. However, this is a request to match funds already being provided for a program that is on Arbitrum. The requested size is also modest, making it easier to approve.
https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/proposal-request-to-match-my-donation-to-boostrap-curve-lending-on-arbitrum/22975/18?u=0x_ultra
https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/proposal-request-to-match-my-donation-to-boostrap-curve-lending-on-arbitrum/22975/16?u=jojo
https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/proposal-request-to-match-my-donation-to-boostrap-curve-lending-on-arbitrum/22975/38?u=princetonblockchain
Curve is a leading DeFi protocol and having another item of its suit (lending) on Arbitrum is an enhancement for our DeFi Ecosystem.
https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/proposal-request-to-match-my-donation-to-boostrap-curve-lending-on-arbitrum/22975/36?u=ocandocrypto
We support this project due to its liquidation innovation in lending
https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/proposal-request-to-match-my-donation-to-boostrap-curve-lending-on-arbitrum/22975/31
https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/proposal-request-to-match-my-donation-to-boostrap-curve-lending-on-arbitrum/22975/30?u=blockworksresearc
https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/proposal-request-to-match-my-donation-to-boostrap-curve-lending-on-arbitrum/22975/29?u=maxlomu
Curve is a leading DeFi protocol and having another item of its suit on Arbitrum is an enhancement for our DeFi Ecosystem.
https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/proposal-request-to-match-my-donation-to-boostrap-curve-lending-on-arbitrum/22975/25?u=cattin
https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/proposal-request-to-match-my-donation-to-boostrap-curve-lending-on-arbitrum/22975/24?u=bob-rossi
Love to see them putting up their own money! I just hope they can pass KYC :-D
https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/proposal-request-to-match-my-donation-to-boostrap-curve-lending-on-arbitrum/22975/23?u=itublockchain
FOR: https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/proposal-request-to-match-my-donation-to-boostrap-curve-lending-on-arbitrum/22975/22?u=savvydao
https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/proposal-request-to-match-my-donation-to-boostrap-curve-lending-on-arbitrum/22975/20?u=ocandocrypto
https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/proposal-request-to-match-my-donation-to-boostrap-curve-lending-on-arbitrum/22975/18?u=0x_ultra
https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/proposal-request-to-match-my-donation-to-boostrap-curve-lending-on-arbitrum/22975/17?u=mcfly
https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/proposal-request-to-match-my-donation-to-boostrap-curve-lending-on-arbitrum/22975/16?u=jojo
Curve Finance, il re dello swap di stablecoin.
cp0x fully supports this project due to its liquidation innovation in lending
We are very happy about the very positive outcome of the snapshot vote and appreciate the overall positve sentiment and the additional feedback. We are looking forward to the final vote on tally.
We are very happy about the very positive outcome of the snapshot vote and appreciate the overall positve sentiment and the additional feedback. We are looking forward to the final vote on tally.
We are voting forward. We had leveraged Curve products in the past and we are happy to keep supporting them within Arbitrum
We are voting forward. We had leveraged Curve products in the past and we are happy to keep supporting them within Arbitrum
Latest developments in the market showed that LRT need deeper liquidity to absorb rough market conditions. This is why some of the ARB will be used to bootstrap LRT/WETH pools, possible LRT tokens are weETH (ether.fi), ezETH (Renzo) and reETH (KelpDAO), which have decent liquidity on arbitrum.
We changed the proposal accordingly.
I helped Michael crafting this proposal and I do the coordination work for this.
We appreciate the overall positive feedback and suggest to move this proposal to snapshot in the next couple of days.
Again, if any questions arise, happy to answer them all.
I wholeheartedly support this proposal. Curve truly embodies the essence of DeFi. As a long-time user, I’ve experienced firsthand the value it brings to the ecosystem. It’s heartening to see the DAO actively pursuing initiatives to enhance network adoption, and this proposal presents a promising opportunity worth considering. Curve’s potential to attract new users to Arbitrum, especially those previously confined to Ethereum, is substantial. The innovative model of Curve lending opens avenues for integration with other projects in the Arbitrum ecosystem, empowering users further. With its well-detailed proposal and proven track record of security, Curve stands as a reputable player in the space. Count me in favor of this proposal. Peace.
Latest developments in the market showed that LRT need deeper liquidity to absorb rough market conditions. This is why some of the ARB will be used to bootstrap LRT/WETH pools, possible LRT tokens are weETH (ether.fi), ezETH (Renzo) and reETH (KelpDAO), which have decent liquidity on arbitrum.
We changed the proposal accordingly.
I helped Michael crafting this proposal and I do the coordination work for this.
We appreciate the overall positive feedback and suggest to move this proposal to snapshot in the next couple of days.
Again, if any questions arise, happy to answer them all.
I wholeheartedly support this proposal. Curve truly embodies the essence of DeFi. As a long-time user, I’ve experienced firsthand the value it brings to the ecosystem. It’s heartening to see the DAO actively pursuing initiatives to enhance network adoption, and this proposal presents a promising opportunity worth considering. Curve’s potential to attract new users to Arbitrum, especially those previously confined to Ethereum, is substantial. The innovative model of Curve lending opens avenues for integration with other projects in the Arbitrum ecosystem, empowering users further. With its well-detailed proposal and proven track record of security, Curve stands as a reputable player in the space. Count me in favor of this proposal. Peace.
As someone who personally uses Curve as well, I'm pleased to see this proposal. It seems that the DAO is actively seeking ways to boost network adoption, and this could be an opportunity we might consider exploring.
Full support for this proposal. Curve is the heart of defi. Long time regular user here, peace
As someone who personally uses Curve as well, I'm pleased to see this proposal. It seems that the DAO is actively seeking ways to boost network adoption, and this could be an opportunity we might consider exploring.
Full support for this proposal. Curve is the heart of defi. Long time regular user here, peace
Hi @michwill we have not yet received the program progress report. If you have any update please let us know, thanks.
We failed to cast our onchain vote as I've been traveling recently and ran into issues on the road. I'm sorry about that, fortunately, the vote passed regardless of that.
We'd like to signal that as previously expressed during the temperature check we do support this proposal and we are looking forward to its implementation.
Hi @michwill we have not yet received the program progress report. If you have any update please let us know, thanks.
We failed to cast our onchain vote as I've been traveling recently and ran into issues on the road. I'm sorry about that, fortunately, the vote passed regardless of that.
We'd like to signal that as previously expressed during the temperature check we do support this proposal and we are looking forward to its implementation.
We previously expressed strong support for this proposal at the Snapshot voting stage, and our stance remains the same for this on-chain vote. To summarize:
We previously expressed strong support for this proposal at the Snapshot voting stage, and our stance remains the same for this on-chain vote. To summarize:
While the requested amount is substantial, we believe the benefits outweigh the costs and the risks are well mitigated. This is an excellent opportunity to set a collaborative precedent with proven ecosystem leaders.
Therefore, on behalf of Arbitrum community members delegating to us, we are voting FOR this proposal to match Michael Egorov's contribution and bring Curve Lending to Arbitrum.
Blockworks Research will be voting FOR this proposal on Tally.
Our reasoning remains largely unchanged from our initial comment. Some of the funds from Michael Egorov have already been used to bootstrap the lending market, which is outside the initially proposed scope of fund usage. However, we don’t think this warrants voting against the proposal. Moreover, Egorov pledging an additional ~20K ARB per month is a great addition to the already committed matching of ~240K ARB.
Blockworks Research will be voting FOR this proposal on Tally.
Our reasoning remains largely unchanged from our initial comment. Some of the funds from Michael Egorov have already been used to bootstrap the lending market, which is outside the initially proposed scope of fund usage. However, we don’t think this warrants voting against the proposal. Moreover, Egorov pledging an additional ~20K ARB per month is a great addition to the already committed matching of ~240K ARB.
We also want to thank @SEEDGov, which, as an LTIPP Advisor, has committed to monitoring the incentive program if this proposal passes.
We vote FOR the proposal on Tally because it's very well-considered and positive to both of Arbitrum and Curve ecosystems as a whole. Additional commitments from Michael is great as well. Looking forward to great impact generated by the execution of it.
Voted "FOR" on Snapshot and Tally.
Reasoning: Curve is a leading DeFi protocol and having another item of its suit on Arbitrum is an enhancement for our DeFi Ecosystem. It would be handy to have it under the LTIPP monitoring.
I voted FOR this proposal on Tally - already persuasive given the nature of the proposal, and the fact that @michwill has already thrown in funds makes it even more attractive.
I do see the concern about doing this outside of LTIP but agree with @Frisson about the value of flexibility when something this compelling comes along.
We're voting FOR the Curve grant request on Tally for our previously stated reasons.
Happy to see that this'll also be included in the LTIPP monitoring!
Sighting the rationale behind this earlier comment from jenga, DAOplomats voted to abstain during the onchain vote on Tally.
See Tally decision here: https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/savvy-dao-delegate-communication-thread/21266/33?u=savvydao
Voted FOR on Tally as well - same reason
I voted FOR this proposal on Tally. This is a compelling proposal from an innovative project that has been building in the DeFi ecosystem for many years. I like that the founder of Curve has committed some of his own capital. I think compelling proposals should always be welcome in the DAO, even if they are outside of established frameworks.
I should clarify. I didn't intend to indicate this proposal broke procedure. Anyone with enough voting power can bring any request they would like to Snapshot. I also understand mechanically why they were unable to join the LTIPP (they missed the application period). I also don't want to imply the proposer did anything wrong.
My question was more to ask the 'why'. As in why didn't they prepare this application in time to meet LTIPP requirements? I don't believe missing a deadline is justification to go around the grant frameworks established and by passing something like this it sets precedent that this is acceptable.
Voting FOR in the On chain Proposal and In favor of inclusion in the LTIPP. It's good that they accepted it. Especially in terms of reports, follow up, transparency, etc.
I understand the concern raised by delegates about not having tried through other funding mechanisms such as the aforementioned LTIPP, do I understand from my point of view that the decision to donate a part of the funds is out of scope? Of course interested in continuing to learn from the opinions of my colleagues in these cases.
The following reflects the views of L2BEAT’s governance team, composed of @krst and @Sinkas, and it’s based on the combined research, fact-checking, and ideation of the two.
We’ll be voting in favor of the proposal and we want to request that the LTIPP council includes Curve in their monitoring. The proposal is well structured and the amount requested is reasonable, and we believe that it would be accepted within the LTIPP if it had been submitted to it, as also suggested by @coinflip. The matching of funds by @michwill also helps inspire confidence in the determination of Curve to successfully utilize the grant to drive growth of their lending product on Arbitrum.
As far as I understand, this offer appeared later than it was possible to submit an application, which means that you will have to wait at least 3 months for the next ones. At the same time, we have almost finished voting Double-Down on STIP Successes, which generally issues 37 million ARB to all past projects.
Taking this into account, submitting such an application is a completely normal procedure:
As far as I understand, this offer appeared later than it was possible to submit an application, which means that you will have to wait at least 3 months for the next ones. At the same time, we have almost finished voting Double-Down on STIP Successes, which generally issues 37 million ARB to all past projects.
Taking this into account, submitting such an application is a completely normal procedure:
So, if you like this proposal you have no restrictions )
We’ll be voting in favor of the proposal and we want to request that the LTIPP council includes Curve in their monitoring.
Blockworks Research will be voting FOR this proposal on Snapshot.
The above is based on the reasoning detailed in our earlier comment.
Although figures and the usage of funds have been slightly modified since our previous comment, they still appear sensible to us. We particularly appreciate the added focus on the emerging LRT market.
Curve is one of the OGs of DeFi on Ethereum. They have a vast user base and liquidity. This proposal can potentially attract users and liquidity to the Arbitrum network because these users will look for better opportunities for their money on a network with cheap gas fees while trusting Curve.
Voting FOR.
Curve is one of the OGs of DeFi on Ethereum. They have a vast user base and liquidity. This proposal can potentially attract users and liquidity to the Arbitrum network because these users will look for better opportunities for their money on a network with cheap gas fees while trusting Curve.
Voting FOR.
To add to what @blockworks research said, this will set a precedent for future protocols and provide continuity for successful projects after exhausting their milestones in their various grant programs. Thriving projects with a good track record can approach the DAO for funding to scale their projects and also generate income for the DAO through a partnership with the protocol.
We previously expressed strong support for this proposal at the Snapshot voting stage, and our stance remains the same for this on-chain vote. To summarize:
We previously expressed strong support for this proposal at the Snapshot voting stage, and our stance remains the same for this on-chain vote. To summarize:
While the requested amount is substantial, we believe the benefits outweigh the costs and the risks are well mitigated. This is an excellent opportunity to set a collaborative precedent with proven ecosystem leaders.
Therefore, on behalf of Arbitrum community members delegating to us, we are voting FOR this proposal to match Michael Egorov's contribution and bring Curve Lending to Arbitrum.
Blockworks Research will be voting FOR this proposal on Tally.
Our reasoning remains largely unchanged from our initial comment. Some of the funds from Michael Egorov have already been used to bootstrap the lending market, which is outside the initially proposed scope of fund usage. However, we don’t think this warrants voting against the proposal. Moreover, Egorov pledging an additional ~20K ARB per month is a great addition to the already committed matching of ~240K ARB.
Blockworks Research will be voting FOR this proposal on Tally.
Our reasoning remains largely unchanged from our initial comment. Some of the funds from Michael Egorov have already been used to bootstrap the lending market, which is outside the initially proposed scope of fund usage. However, we don’t think this warrants voting against the proposal. Moreover, Egorov pledging an additional ~20K ARB per month is a great addition to the already committed matching of ~240K ARB.
We also want to thank @SEEDGov, which, as an LTIPP Advisor, has committed to monitoring the incentive program if this proposal passes.
We vote FOR the proposal on Tally because it's very well-considered and positive to both of Arbitrum and Curve ecosystems as a whole. Additional commitments from Michael is great as well. Looking forward to great impact generated by the execution of it.
Voted "FOR" on Snapshot and Tally.
Reasoning: Curve is a leading DeFi protocol and having another item of its suit on Arbitrum is an enhancement for our DeFi Ecosystem. It would be handy to have it under the LTIPP monitoring.
I voted FOR this proposal on Tally - already persuasive given the nature of the proposal, and the fact that @michwill has already thrown in funds makes it even more attractive.
I do see the concern about doing this outside of LTIP but agree with @Frisson about the value of flexibility when something this compelling comes along.
We're voting FOR the Curve grant request on Tally for our previously stated reasons.
Happy to see that this'll also be included in the LTIPP monitoring!
Sighting the rationale behind this earlier comment from jenga, DAOplomats voted to abstain during the onchain vote on Tally.
See Tally decision here: https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/savvy-dao-delegate-communication-thread/21266/33?u=savvydao
Voted FOR on Tally as well - same reason
I voted FOR this proposal on Tally. This is a compelling proposal from an innovative project that has been building in the DeFi ecosystem for many years. I like that the founder of Curve has committed some of his own capital. I think compelling proposals should always be welcome in the DAO, even if they are outside of established frameworks.
I should clarify. I didn't intend to indicate this proposal broke procedure. Anyone with enough voting power can bring any request they would like to Snapshot. I also understand mechanically why they were unable to join the LTIPP (they missed the application period). I also don't want to imply the proposer did anything wrong.
My question was more to ask the 'why'. As in why didn't they prepare this application in time to meet LTIPP requirements? I don't believe missing a deadline is justification to go around the grant frameworks established and by passing something like this it sets precedent that this is acceptable.
Voting FOR in the On chain Proposal and In favor of inclusion in the LTIPP. It's good that they accepted it. Especially in terms of reports, follow up, transparency, etc.
I understand the concern raised by delegates about not having tried through other funding mechanisms such as the aforementioned LTIPP, do I understand from my point of view that the decision to donate a part of the funds is out of scope? Of course interested in continuing to learn from the opinions of my colleagues in these cases.
The following reflects the views of L2BEAT’s governance team, composed of @krst and @Sinkas, and it’s based on the combined research, fact-checking, and ideation of the two.
We’ll be voting in favor of the proposal and we want to request that the LTIPP council includes Curve in their monitoring. The proposal is well structured and the amount requested is reasonable, and we believe that it would be accepted within the LTIPP if it had been submitted to it, as also suggested by @coinflip. The matching of funds by @michwill also helps inspire confidence in the determination of Curve to successfully utilize the grant to drive growth of their lending product on Arbitrum.
As far as I understand, this offer appeared later than it was possible to submit an application, which means that you will have to wait at least 3 months for the next ones. At the same time, we have almost finished voting Double-Down on STIP Successes, which generally issues 37 million ARB to all past projects.
Taking this into account, submitting such an application is a completely normal procedure:
As far as I understand, this offer appeared later than it was possible to submit an application, which means that you will have to wait at least 3 months for the next ones. At the same time, we have almost finished voting Double-Down on STIP Successes, which generally issues 37 million ARB to all past projects.
Taking this into account, submitting such an application is a completely normal procedure:
So, if you like this proposal you have no restrictions )
We’ll be voting in favor of the proposal and we want to request that the LTIPP council includes Curve in their monitoring.
Blockworks Research will be voting FOR this proposal on Snapshot.
The above is based on the reasoning detailed in our earlier comment.
Although figures and the usage of funds have been slightly modified since our previous comment, they still appear sensible to us. We particularly appreciate the added focus on the emerging LRT market.
Curve is one of the OGs of DeFi on Ethereum. They have a vast user base and liquidity. This proposal can potentially attract users and liquidity to the Arbitrum network because these users will look for better opportunities for their money on a network with cheap gas fees while trusting Curve.
Voting FOR.
Curve is one of the OGs of DeFi on Ethereum. They have a vast user base and liquidity. This proposal can potentially attract users and liquidity to the Arbitrum network because these users will look for better opportunities for their money on a network with cheap gas fees while trusting Curve.
Voting FOR.
To add to what @blockworks research said, this will set a precedent for future protocols and provide continuity for successful projects after exhausting their milestones in their various grant programs. Thriving projects with a good track record can approach the DAO for funding to scale their projects and also generate income for the DAO through a partnership with the protocol.
I should clarify. I didn't intend to indicate this proposal broke procedure. Anyone with enough voting power can bring any request they would like to Snapshot. I also understand mechanically why they were unable to join the LTIPP (they missed the application period). I also don't want to imply the proposer did anything wrong.
My question was more to ask the 'why'. As in why didn't they prepare this application in time to meet LTIPP requirements? I don't believe missing a deadline is justification to go around the grant frameworks established and by passing something like this it sets precedent that this is acceptable.
I'll also again clarify that I don't believe that was the intention of the proposer, just speaking towards the broader picture.
Voting FOR in the On chain Proposal and In favor of inclusion in the LTIPP. It's good that they accepted it. Especially in terms of reports, follow up, transparency, etc.
I understand the concern raised by delegates about not having tried through other funding mechanisms such as the aforementioned LTIPP, do I understand from my point of view that the decision to donate a part of the funds is out of scope? Of course interested in continuing to learn from the opinions of my colleagues in these cases.
However, I think that raising these alerts so that they do not become valid is very positive and in my opinion helps us lay the foundations for the DAO's decision framework. Very good.
The following reflects the views of L2BEAT’s governance team, composed of @krst and @Sinkas, and it’s based on the combined research, fact-checking, and ideation of the two.
We’ll be voting in favor of the proposal and we want to request that the LTIPP council includes Curve in their monitoring. The proposal is well structured and the amount requested is reasonable, and we believe that it would be accepted within the LTIPP if it had been submitted to it, as also suggested by @coinflip. The matching of funds by @michwill also helps inspire confidence in the determination of Curve to successfully utilize the grant to drive growth of their lending product on Arbitrum.
We understand the concern raised by other delegates regarding setting a bad precedent of protocols applying outside of programs, but we believe instead of letting that drive projects (especially well-established ones) away from Arbitrum, we should focus on making DAO programs more visible and easy to discover.
We’ll be voting in favor of the proposal and we want to request that the LTIPP council includes Curve in their monitoring.
This is a great idea, should this proposal be approved, @SEEDGov as an LTIPP Advisor we commit to monitoring the development of the incentives distribution.
Numbers will be published in the forum after the bi-weekly adjustment.
In this regard, it would be fantastic if Curve committed to report completing the same template.
We are voting "For" this Curve Lending on Arbitrum proposal, despite falling outside our usual scope. This proposal is solid and poised to attract more users, increasing platform activity and overall utility. Curve's innovative lending model could foster new integrations within our ecosystem, enhancing functionalities and empowering users. The substantial benefits, coupled with matching funds from Curve’s founder, underscore both of our commitment.
After consideration Treasure’s Arbitrum Representative Council (ARC) would like to share the following feedback on the proposal
We have voted "Abstain".
After consideration Treasure’s Arbitrum Representative Council (ARC) would like to share the following feedback on the proposal
We have voted "Abstain".
We don't have any specific objections to this proposal and appreciate @michwill's offer to utilize his ARB to incentivize Curve on Arbitrum. However, in line with our recent voting on LTIP proposals, we're hesitant about transitioning to a model where delegates are responsible for reviewing and approving incentive-based grant spending without input and feedback from domain experts.
The Princeton Blockchain Club is voting FOR this grant to bootstrap Curve's lending market on Arbitrum.
This proposal heavily benefits the liquid restaking narrative on Arbitrum, and additionally supports Curve's decentralized stablecoin. Egorov doing a 100% grant match out of his own pocket (regardless if the proposal passes) is the cherry on top.
The Princeton Blockchain Club is voting FOR this grant to bootstrap Curve's lending market on Arbitrum.
This proposal heavily benefits the liquid restaking narrative on Arbitrum, and additionally supports Curve's decentralized stablecoin. Egorov doing a 100% grant match out of his own pocket (regardless if the proposal passes) is the cherry on top.
We're not really a big fan that this was outside of something like the LTIPP, but considering we're still voting on approving LTIPP grants this fits in pretty well. Great timing tbh.
The @SEEDgov team has thoroughly reviewed and evaluated this proposal, and we're voting FOR this proposal. We appreciate the work @Jadmat did on this analysis.
We'd like to highlight that CurveLens introduces significant innovations in its liquidation and efficiency mechanisms, particularly in the integration of crvUSD, the stablecoin that can be borrowed against any of the listed assets. @michwill has incentivized this protocol on Arbitrum with personal capital, not DAO funds, and has made similar efforts for crvUSD across various Layer 2s and other prominent EVM chains to increase liquidity for this new product.
The @SEEDgov team has thoroughly reviewed and evaluated this proposal, and we're voting FOR this proposal. We appreciate the work @Jadmat did on this analysis.
We'd like to highlight that CurveLens introduces significant innovations in its liquidation and efficiency mechanisms, particularly in the integration of crvUSD, the stablecoin that can be borrowed against any of the listed assets. @michwill has incentivized this protocol on Arbitrum with personal capital, not DAO funds, and has made similar efforts for crvUSD across various Layer 2s and other prominent EVM chains to increase liquidity for this new product.
For more details on how it works, you can visit: https://cryptorisks.substack.com/p/a-primer-on-curve-lending
However, we must be cautious regarding incidents like the one on 04/13; CRV wasn't arbitrable for several hours, which led to the liquidation of some positions using this asset as collateral. This incident was related to the low liquidity of CRV on Arbitrum and a shortage of arbitrage operators. While these issues were not severe, the inclusion of CRV did expose some risks.
We believe the proposal is solid, coherent, and well-founded. It proposes using ARB as a direct incentive, and it would be interesting to delve deeper into the rationale for this strategy, rather than directly incentivizing the stakers. We estimate that this point has already been considered and that the decision was made in pursuit of maximum efficiency.
We vote in favor. CurveLens' choice of Arbitrum as its first chain following Ethereum is key to the Curve ecosystem, as it brings significant capital efficiency to users, as well as opening up many possibilities for innovation in the creation of Perps and high-leverage operations. CrvUSD has performed impeccably since its deployment. Curve, already established as an essential on-chain infrastructure, is expanding its ecosystem and introducing innovations across various sectors; its integration into Arbitrum represents a win-win that also benefits the users.
I will be voting "Against" this proposal.
Nothing against the proposal itself (It looks well thought out and I would support it if it were in the LTIPP), simply concerned about setting precedent of projects asking for grant funds outside of the processes already in place. I'd like to see how the LTIPP plays out first.
I will be voting "Against" this proposal.
Nothing against the proposal itself (It looks well thought out and I would support it if it were in the LTIPP), simply concerned about setting precedent of projects asking for grant funds outside of the processes already in place. I'd like to see how the LTIPP plays out first.
The proposal seems to pretty closely mirror what an LTIPP grant application would have looked like, is there a reason why this wasn't just part of the LTIPP process?
Edit: Updating (5.21.2024) here to not take up more forum space, but I have voted “Against” on Tally. My opinion remains the same as the snapshot vote. After we see what comes of the LTIPP experiment I will re-assess my opinion on this.
For me, this is without a doubt a proposal that benefits both ecosystems, as well as with clear outputs and possible results.
I have interacted with Curve in the past and it is without a doubt a great player.
I vote FOR on this proposal.
Before saying anything else, we would like to thank @michwill for this proposal with huge potential and for his contributions. The success of Curve Finance on Ethereum is well known, and we agree with the delegates on the forum that this proposal will attract great liquidity to Arbitrum. We are truly looking forward to seeing how the approval of this proposal will impact the Arbitrum ecosystem. Consequently, we are supportive of this proposal.
Savvy DAO votes FOR this proposal. We really appreciate the aligned incentives and matching concept initiated here. We would like to see more of these in the DAO!
We could use artizen.fund/en/ to do this. :smile:
See delegate thread here: https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/savvy-dao-delegate-communication-thread/21266/18?u=savvydao
We see a lot of potential benefits in boosting Curve with this proposal. A lot of the prior comments have touched on these beneficial points. Some points of interest however could be that the emphasis on soft-liquidation, while innovative, carries risk if not rigorously stress-tested in diverse market conditions. It's essential that we critically monitor the funds and protocol.
Overall, this is a great precedent for future projects requesting funds and something we would definitely like to see more!
I’m voting in support of this proposal. It sets a great precedent for aligned funding requests passing outside of rigid frameworks.
The proposal will surely help in the crvUSD expansion plans on Arbitrum.
Good luck!
This is an excellent opportunity for the DAO, and we will happily support it. The proposal is comprehensive and aligns with our goals. A efficient lending market for ARB with deep liquidity is highly needed to develop the ecosystem, and this initiative meets that need.
The personal funding commitment from the founder is an interesting approach. Overall, this seems like a great deal for the DAO, and we're hopeful similar situations may arise in the future. We are voting a strong "for" on this proposal.
Voting a strong "for" on this proposal.
Great opportunity for the DAO, i'll happily support it. Not much to add, it's really complete and fits with the direction that we've gone through with other programs. I don't think it should be included in LTIPP as the funding Michael proposes is different.
This proposal asks for a relatively small grant for the return it promises in terms of a successful project launching on the chain. However, I would urge the DAO to consider the potential consequences of setting a precedent, in terms of a big name project being offered one-off funding when the DAO has already spent time and efforts curating dedicated programs for funding Dapps.
Pretty good opportunity for the DAO. We don't have really any complaints and the grant matching is a great decision. Coming from personal funds is interesting and we're curious if these are from vested or unvested funds/ if there were any other situations like this? This seems like a really good deal for the DAO and we're hopeful maybe in the future similar situations like this will arise!
While this proposal is outside of a framework that should not be a blocker for a well articulated proposal which would more than easily cross the bar for support from on of our formal programs.
A top tier protocol that has shown a desire to work with Arbitrum as part of its L2 expansion efforts, a focus on improving liquidity for the ARB token, well articulated use of the grants and a matching contribution of ARB tokens.
While this proposal is outside of a framework that should not be a blocker for a well articulated proposal which would more than easily cross the bar for support from on of our formal programs.
A top tier protocol that has shown a desire to work with Arbitrum as part of its L2 expansion efforts, a focus on improving liquidity for the ARB token, well articulated use of the grants and a matching contribution of ARB tokens.
More significantly i'm excited to see how we can grow this discussion to see how we can support Curve to encourage the moving of more assets and activity from their wide set of liquidity providers on Ethereum mainnet to Arbitrum. We can provide liquidity providers and users of Curve a highly secure chain, with a robust DeFi ecosystem, fast blocks (0.25s), no sandwich attacks and competitive low fees.
I'll support this proposal when it comes up for vote.
We at Blockworks Research think this one-off incentive request would set a great precedent for the future. It makes sense that qualifying for a one-off capital allocation is more challenging than receiving funds through the dedicated accelerator programs (e.g., STIP & LTIPP), especially for larger projects such as Curve. This encourages projects to apply through the official programs and maintains a level playing field. More specifically, we truly like the idea of matching the requested ARB from the DAO, and feel that the requested amount is fair. This proposal also directly benefits ARB holders by enabling additional/more liquid use cases for the token.
I should clarify. I didn't intend to indicate this proposal broke procedure. Anyone with enough voting power can bring any request they would like to Snapshot. I also understand mechanically why they were unable to join the LTIPP (they missed the application period). I also don't want to imply the proposer did anything wrong.
My question was more to ask the 'why'. As in why didn't they prepare this application in time to meet LTIPP requirements? I don't believe missing a deadline is justification to go around the grant frameworks established and by passing something like this it sets precedent that this is acceptable.
I'll also again clarify that I don't believe that was the intention of the proposer, just speaking towards the broader picture.
Voting FOR in the On chain Proposal and In favor of inclusion in the LTIPP. It's good that they accepted it. Especially in terms of reports, follow up, transparency, etc.
I understand the concern raised by delegates about not having tried through other funding mechanisms such as the aforementioned LTIPP, do I understand from my point of view that the decision to donate a part of the funds is out of scope? Of course interested in continuing to learn from the opinions of my colleagues in these cases.
However, I think that raising these alerts so that they do not become valid is very positive and in my opinion helps us lay the foundations for the DAO's decision framework. Very good.
The following reflects the views of L2BEAT’s governance team, composed of @krst and @Sinkas, and it’s based on the combined research, fact-checking, and ideation of the two.
We’ll be voting in favor of the proposal and we want to request that the LTIPP council includes Curve in their monitoring. The proposal is well structured and the amount requested is reasonable, and we believe that it would be accepted within the LTIPP if it had been submitted to it, as also suggested by @coinflip. The matching of funds by @michwill also helps inspire confidence in the determination of Curve to successfully utilize the grant to drive growth of their lending product on Arbitrum.
We understand the concern raised by other delegates regarding setting a bad precedent of protocols applying outside of programs, but we believe instead of letting that drive projects (especially well-established ones) away from Arbitrum, we should focus on making DAO programs more visible and easy to discover.
We’ll be voting in favor of the proposal and we want to request that the LTIPP council includes Curve in their monitoring.
This is a great idea, should this proposal be approved, @SEEDGov as an LTIPP Advisor we commit to monitoring the development of the incentives distribution.
Numbers will be published in the forum after the bi-weekly adjustment.
In this regard, it would be fantastic if Curve committed to report completing the same template.
We are voting "For" this Curve Lending on Arbitrum proposal, despite falling outside our usual scope. This proposal is solid and poised to attract more users, increasing platform activity and overall utility. Curve's innovative lending model could foster new integrations within our ecosystem, enhancing functionalities and empowering users. The substantial benefits, coupled with matching funds from Curve’s founder, underscore both of our commitment.
After consideration Treasure’s Arbitrum Representative Council (ARC) would like to share the following feedback on the proposal
We have voted "Abstain".
After consideration Treasure’s Arbitrum Representative Council (ARC) would like to share the following feedback on the proposal
We have voted "Abstain".
We don't have any specific objections to this proposal and appreciate @michwill's offer to utilize his ARB to incentivize Curve on Arbitrum. However, in line with our recent voting on LTIP proposals, we're hesitant about transitioning to a model where delegates are responsible for reviewing and approving incentive-based grant spending without input and feedback from domain experts.
The Princeton Blockchain Club is voting FOR this grant to bootstrap Curve's lending market on Arbitrum.
This proposal heavily benefits the liquid restaking narrative on Arbitrum, and additionally supports Curve's decentralized stablecoin. Egorov doing a 100% grant match out of his own pocket (regardless if the proposal passes) is the cherry on top.
The Princeton Blockchain Club is voting FOR this grant to bootstrap Curve's lending market on Arbitrum.
This proposal heavily benefits the liquid restaking narrative on Arbitrum, and additionally supports Curve's decentralized stablecoin. Egorov doing a 100% grant match out of his own pocket (regardless if the proposal passes) is the cherry on top.
We're not really a big fan that this was outside of something like the LTIPP, but considering we're still voting on approving LTIPP grants this fits in pretty well. Great timing tbh.
The @SEEDgov team has thoroughly reviewed and evaluated this proposal, and we're voting FOR this proposal. We appreciate the work @Jadmat did on this analysis.
We'd like to highlight that CurveLens introduces significant innovations in its liquidation and efficiency mechanisms, particularly in the integration of crvUSD, the stablecoin that can be borrowed against any of the listed assets. @michwill has incentivized this protocol on Arbitrum with personal capital, not DAO funds, and has made similar efforts for crvUSD across various Layer 2s and other prominent EVM chains to increase liquidity for this new product.
The @SEEDgov team has thoroughly reviewed and evaluated this proposal, and we're voting FOR this proposal. We appreciate the work @Jadmat did on this analysis.
We'd like to highlight that CurveLens introduces significant innovations in its liquidation and efficiency mechanisms, particularly in the integration of crvUSD, the stablecoin that can be borrowed against any of the listed assets. @michwill has incentivized this protocol on Arbitrum with personal capital, not DAO funds, and has made similar efforts for crvUSD across various Layer 2s and other prominent EVM chains to increase liquidity for this new product.
For more details on how it works, you can visit: https://cryptorisks.substack.com/p/a-primer-on-curve-lending
However, we must be cautious regarding incidents like the one on 04/13; CRV wasn't arbitrable for several hours, which led to the liquidation of some positions using this asset as collateral. This incident was related to the low liquidity of CRV on Arbitrum and a shortage of arbitrage operators. While these issues were not severe, the inclusion of CRV did expose some risks.
We believe the proposal is solid, coherent, and well-founded. It proposes using ARB as a direct incentive, and it would be interesting to delve deeper into the rationale for this strategy, rather than directly incentivizing the stakers. We estimate that this point has already been considered and that the decision was made in pursuit of maximum efficiency.
We vote in favor. CurveLens' choice of Arbitrum as its first chain following Ethereum is key to the Curve ecosystem, as it brings significant capital efficiency to users, as well as opening up many possibilities for innovation in the creation of Perps and high-leverage operations. CrvUSD has performed impeccably since its deployment. Curve, already established as an essential on-chain infrastructure, is expanding its ecosystem and introducing innovations across various sectors; its integration into Arbitrum represents a win-win that also benefits the users.
I will be voting "Against" this proposal.
Nothing against the proposal itself (It looks well thought out and I would support it if it were in the LTIPP), simply concerned about setting precedent of projects asking for grant funds outside of the processes already in place. I'd like to see how the LTIPP plays out first.
I will be voting "Against" this proposal.
Nothing against the proposal itself (It looks well thought out and I would support it if it were in the LTIPP), simply concerned about setting precedent of projects asking for grant funds outside of the processes already in place. I'd like to see how the LTIPP plays out first.
The proposal seems to pretty closely mirror what an LTIPP grant application would have looked like, is there a reason why this wasn't just part of the LTIPP process?
Edit: Updating (5.21.2024) here to not take up more forum space, but I have voted “Against” on Tally. My opinion remains the same as the snapshot vote. After we see what comes of the LTIPP experiment I will re-assess my opinion on this.
For me, this is without a doubt a proposal that benefits both ecosystems, as well as with clear outputs and possible results.
I have interacted with Curve in the past and it is without a doubt a great player.
I vote FOR on this proposal.
Before saying anything else, we would like to thank @michwill for this proposal with huge potential and for his contributions. The success of Curve Finance on Ethereum is well known, and we agree with the delegates on the forum that this proposal will attract great liquidity to Arbitrum. We are truly looking forward to seeing how the approval of this proposal will impact the Arbitrum ecosystem. Consequently, we are supportive of this proposal.
Savvy DAO votes FOR this proposal. We really appreciate the aligned incentives and matching concept initiated here. We would like to see more of these in the DAO!
We could use artizen.fund/en/ to do this. :smile:
See delegate thread here: https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/savvy-dao-delegate-communication-thread/21266/18?u=savvydao
We see a lot of potential benefits in boosting Curve with this proposal. A lot of the prior comments have touched on these beneficial points. Some points of interest however could be that the emphasis on soft-liquidation, while innovative, carries risk if not rigorously stress-tested in diverse market conditions. It's essential that we critically monitor the funds and protocol.
Overall, this is a great precedent for future projects requesting funds and something we would definitely like to see more!
I’m voting in support of this proposal. It sets a great precedent for aligned funding requests passing outside of rigid frameworks.
The proposal will surely help in the crvUSD expansion plans on Arbitrum.
Good luck!
This is an excellent opportunity for the DAO, and we will happily support it. The proposal is comprehensive and aligns with our goals. A efficient lending market for ARB with deep liquidity is highly needed to develop the ecosystem, and this initiative meets that need.
The personal funding commitment from the founder is an interesting approach. Overall, this seems like a great deal for the DAO, and we're hopeful similar situations may arise in the future. We are voting a strong "for" on this proposal.
Voting a strong "for" on this proposal.
Great opportunity for the DAO, i'll happily support it. Not much to add, it's really complete and fits with the direction that we've gone through with other programs. I don't think it should be included in LTIPP as the funding Michael proposes is different.
This proposal asks for a relatively small grant for the return it promises in terms of a successful project launching on the chain. However, I would urge the DAO to consider the potential consequences of setting a precedent, in terms of a big name project being offered one-off funding when the DAO has already spent time and efforts curating dedicated programs for funding Dapps.
Pretty good opportunity for the DAO. We don't have really any complaints and the grant matching is a great decision. Coming from personal funds is interesting and we're curious if these are from vested or unvested funds/ if there were any other situations like this? This seems like a really good deal for the DAO and we're hopeful maybe in the future similar situations like this will arise!
While this proposal is outside of a framework that should not be a blocker for a well articulated proposal which would more than easily cross the bar for support from on of our formal programs.
A top tier protocol that has shown a desire to work with Arbitrum as part of its L2 expansion efforts, a focus on improving liquidity for the ARB token, well articulated use of the grants and a matching contribution of ARB tokens.
While this proposal is outside of a framework that should not be a blocker for a well articulated proposal which would more than easily cross the bar for support from on of our formal programs.
A top tier protocol that has shown a desire to work with Arbitrum as part of its L2 expansion efforts, a focus on improving liquidity for the ARB token, well articulated use of the grants and a matching contribution of ARB tokens.
More significantly i'm excited to see how we can grow this discussion to see how we can support Curve to encourage the moving of more assets and activity from their wide set of liquidity providers on Ethereum mainnet to Arbitrum. We can provide liquidity providers and users of Curve a highly secure chain, with a robust DeFi ecosystem, fast blocks (0.25s), no sandwich attacks and competitive low fees.
I'll support this proposal when it comes up for vote.
We at Blockworks Research think this one-off incentive request would set a great precedent for the future. It makes sense that qualifying for a one-off capital allocation is more challenging than receiving funds through the dedicated accelerator programs (e.g., STIP & LTIPP), especially for larger projects such as Curve. This encourages projects to apply through the official programs and maintains a level playing field. More specifically, we truly like the idea of matching the requested ARB from the DAO, and feel that the requested amount is fair. This proposal also directly benefits ARB holders by enabling additional/more liquid use cases for the token.
Voting a strong "for" on this proposal.
Also, if this passes, it would be basically one of a kind: an incentive proposal outside of any framework program. Which is something that we need to collectively do as a dao.
Fully support this proposal, Curve in the backbone of DeFi since the beginning!
Great proposal, @michwill I fully support this project due to its liquidation innovation!
Would like to add some colours to this.
I helped a bit in drafting this proposal, nothing big, just ensuring all checks and balances were there, gave some feedback, + was ensuring that there was the usage of a template that is now well known, the one used in ltipp, for delegates' convenience.
Would like to add some colours to this.
I helped a bit in drafting this proposal, nothing big, just ensuring all checks and balances were there, gave some feedback, + was ensuring that there was the usage of a template that is now well known, the one used in ltipp, for delegates' convenience.
All in all i personally think the proposal is quite good, the product is awesome (i have been personally using crvusd on main net), and it really fits the defi culture of arbitrum.
I am very curious on how the dao will react to a (second) proposal outside grant framework, and if it will have the ability to execute it or not.
Cheers and props to mich for putting the money out of his pocket regardless of the outcome of the proposal
Curve has the potential to bring new users to arbitrum that before were only in ethereum. Curve lending is a novel and interesting model imo that also allows other projects in the arbitrum ecosystem to create integrations and empower users.
The proposal is well detailed and curve is a known player that has a good history also regarding security. I'm in favor of this proposal
Voting a strong "for" on this proposal.
Also, if this passes, it would be basically one of a kind: an incentive proposal outside of any framework program. Which is something that we need to collectively do as a dao.
Fully support this proposal, Curve in the backbone of DeFi since the beginning!
Great proposal, @michwill I fully support this project due to its liquidation innovation!
Would like to add some colours to this.
I helped a bit in drafting this proposal, nothing big, just ensuring all checks and balances were there, gave some feedback, + was ensuring that there was the usage of a template that is now well known, the one used in ltipp, for delegates' convenience.
Would like to add some colours to this.
I helped a bit in drafting this proposal, nothing big, just ensuring all checks and balances were there, gave some feedback, + was ensuring that there was the usage of a template that is now well known, the one used in ltipp, for delegates' convenience.
All in all i personally think the proposal is quite good, the product is awesome (i have been personally using crvusd on main net), and it really fits the defi culture of arbitrum.
I am very curious on how the dao will react to a (second) proposal outside grant framework, and if it will have the ability to execute it or not.
Cheers and props to mich for putting the money out of his pocket regardless of the outcome of the proposal
Curve has the potential to bring new users to arbitrum that before were only in ethereum. Curve lending is a novel and interesting model imo that also allows other projects in the arbitrum ecosystem to create integrations and empower users.
The proposal is well detailed and curve is a known player that has a good history also regarding security. I'm in favor of this proposal
