This proposal serves as a follow-up to [FSVP-7] stVCX Smart Vault and aims to modify the Annual Percentage Yield (APY) for staked VCX to the following levels:
3 months: 5% APY
6 months: 10% APY
9 months: 15% APY
12 months: 25% APY
VCX rewards will be distributed on a monthly basis. Stakers will be able to claim their rewards according to their staking duration and amount.
The adjustment is in line with current liquidity levels that can support future sell pressure while still incentivizing longer term staking.
The question is, why should I lock my VCX for 25% in return if the price volatility is so high and there is no good story convincing me the price could stay stable at least?
I still voted yes because I think we should decrease the staking rewards to make them look more legit. However at the same time we need to decrease oVCX rewards for vaults to make this staking option the most lucrative option.
Youd like lock your VCX for 25% APY because your long VCX and believe that listing and much more exposure is coming to VaultCraft. Pretty stupid question.
Im an OG holder and diamond handing this until CEX’s. Its going to explode.
Simple fanboy talk is not helpful at all. I have been in this project since Popcorn and have seen CEX listings come and… not have that much impact. The underlying story has to be compelling for a CEX listing to generate cash inflows.
Yes, Im a fanboy. And OG as well. I can elaborate on the narrative since you’re a nonbeliever.
OKX listing seems imminent given the recent partnership with OKX Web3. I was around during the MEXC days, and that’s a straight-up wash exchange. OKX and MEXC are light years apart in terms of volume and users.
The LBTC Smart Vault, if positioned correctly in DeFi and Web3, will be a killer product. I assume they’re partnering with all of Lombard’s DeFi partners, i.e., Pendle, Curve, Gearbox, etc.
6% of the supply has already been burned. I expect the supply will continue to be burned at the same rate. This definitely matters in terms of attracting new token holders.
Assuming VaultCraft achieves $100M TVL, which I think they will, that’s an indication of protocol success, which the token will reflect.
If rev continues to be used for buybacks, which I hope they will, that will certainly be a net positive for VCX.
I could go on. If you want to sell your VCX, I’ll also buy it from you.
The only revenue used is revenue from oVCX exercises, not that generated from vault fees. The success of Vaultcraft needs to be linked to the VCX price. That’s why I advocate using (parts of) that vault revenue for buybacks to directly tie TVL growth to VCX appreciation. This story is much easier to convey.
But the buybacks are funded from revenue from oVCX redemptions. They’re already doing this, no @krychek? I think that’s why [VIP-37] oVCX Cool Down Period was proposed as well, for a better buyback strategy.
Ive been in crypto since 2016, and VCX’s volatility is nothing new. Comparatively, its not as bad as all of these high fdv low float tokens like W, zkLink, etc.
I think an optimal staking strategy would def be 3 or 6 months though. Lock staking for a year in cypto is nuts.
That is what I meant. At the moment the only source of money used for buybacks is revenue from oVCX redemptions. But to make that work people need to hold on to their VCX after redeeming their oVCX (at least for some time - like months!) instead of dumping it right away. To make holding on to VCX a rational choice you need to be convinced that VCX will increase in value which means there needs to be some connection between the success of the project and VCX price (!)besides oVCX redemptions.
Mate, you keep babbling about success of the project when the team has clearly laid out a GTM. They’ve also slowly climbed to 25M this year, integrated with OKX, and plan on continuing integrations to get much more exposure. Please sell all of your tokens to me. I will literally buy them all, or anyone’s for that matter. Please stop doom and gloom posting. VCX is going to the feggin moon.
@chowda did you read and understand what I wrote? I ask because you didn’t reference anything in my post. The success (which is respectable) means nothing if there is no inflow of funds into the utility token/the success is directly tied to the token.
I’m not doom posting, I’m pointing out problems with communication and execution (previously behind the scenes, but now publicly as I feel like I’m falling on deaf ears). Look at my posting history - I’ve been invested in this project for literally years.
Yeah but unfortunately this is not worth it. I tried it some time and the amount of VCX you would need (in $ value) is almost as high as the amount you actually locked up in a vault. Also the risk of VCX dropping in price doesn’t make it a good deal, especially if you need to dump (out of fear the price could drop further) your earned VCX as soon as you acquire it.
