This partnership is a bad idea and goes against the fundamental values of DeFi and cryptocurrency.
2 Likes
The entire addition of a Repayment Option leaves a sour taste in my mouth–particularly at $10. My first instinct would be to remove the purchase option in its entirety. Anchoring the DAO to negotiate against a $10 strike price in a clause that should not even exist is extremely predatory. Unfortunately, Wintermute knows that it has the upperhand negotiating with a DAO and is attempting to extract ridiculous terms.
Although I’m not against a market-making deal, this proposal is not seeking to do the DAO a kind favor by accepting a free $7M loan. A deal structured in good faith would either eliminate the purchase option entirely or set the strike price substantially higher to reflect INST’s potential appreciation over the loan term.
5 Likes
@WintermuteGovernance If the proposal is not approved, will Fluid DEX not be integrated into your trading systems?
If the answer is yes, I don’t understand why this is included in the proposal.
If the answer is no, then we have more clarity about what is being negotiated.
Regarding the Strike, something that can protect both parties would be a variable function; something like:
Stk = MAX(TWAP * 0.85, 10 USD)
Highest result between “TWAP (e.g. in the last 30-45 days before expiry), with a 15% discount” or “10 USD”.
This means that
If the TWAP with 15% discount exceeds 10 USD, the result will be this adjusted value. Otherwise the result is 10 USD.
In this way, Wintermute would not be adding risk to its business and would not be exposing the Dao to a potentially low price.
This gives us scenarios where the FLUID TWAP at maturity is:
Between 0 USD and 10 USD: the Dao had no costs (losses) greater than a potential opportunity cost of use. Wintermute will not exercise the option.
Between 10 USD < and 11.76 USD: the option is executed at 10 USD. The spread between what the Dao charges and the TWAP will be up to 15%.
Any price above 11.76 USD: a discount of 15% will be applied.
1 Like
The proposal is already passed.
3 Likes
The proposal has been voted on and passed 11-0
2 Likes
After six months, I would like to request that @WintermuteGovernance provide more context on their current active liquidity provision strategies, as well as their plans for the next six months.
I’m concerned because the current state of FLUID token liquidity is quite poor compared to most protocols in the top 50 on DeFiLlama’s DeFi overview tab. And it’s even worse when compared specifically to other DEX protocols.
It’s worth noting that FLUID hasn’t been listed on any new exchanges for several months and still lacks perpetual markets.
I hope to be proven wrong, but so far, the partnership and loan extended to Wintermute do not appear to have added value to Fluid. In fact, I believe the protocol would likely be in a similar position even without that arrangement.
2 Likes
Hello,
Was this $500 million loan ever completed?
If so, can I get a link to the blockchain transaction?
1 Like
hi, it was a 700k $fluid loan, not a $500m loan
https://etherscan.io/tx/0x05f4edbca63f33c50ff02ae6896e8984bcc64f282a43a174d0e4c19555d5978c
1 Like
catching up on this discussion, what’s your current assessment on the quality of Wintermute’s liquidity provision so far? Personally I have witnessed discussion on X where people complain about poor liquidity. On top of that I had a conversation yesterday with a liquid token fund who are interested in acquiring $fluid in size but there number one concern is liquidity not only leading to entry slippage but also putting at risk a potential future exit
3 Likes
+1 liquidity of the token gets worst not better. And now that liquidity on Fluid DEX is out of range price impact is bad
Perhaps they can acquire a large amount of FLUID tokens through Pantera’s OTC desk, as on-chain data indicates that Pantera is selling part of its holdings.