ALPACA+ (Shares A and Shares B)

Alpaca Improvement Proposal (AIP) Product & Feature
1

Venus has just released Venus Prime. This is a new token that they are going to release to existing shareholders in order to reduce the circulating supply of XVS. This token is Soulbound thus cannot be transferred, bought or sold to other addresses. The creation of this new token is a way to raise cash and giving rewards to the lending/borrowing protocol without increasing the supply of the main token. With the promise that it will have some use in the future.

Relevant links

I propose a few alternatives

(1) Doing exactly the same
Advantages

  • We are reducing the ALPACA circulating supply.
  • We can increase the rewards in AF2.0 effectively attracting more users.
  • The tokens are not going to increase the market cap of ALPACA because they cannot be transferred/bought/sold.

Disadvantages

  • We have to think of something to give to these new future token holders (for instance: reducing actual rewards to actual ALPACA shareholders)

(2) Burning ALPACA for the new token
In this case we reduce the ALPACA circulation effectively but have to think again of some rewards for the sacrifice.

(3) Making a higher value token that can be interchanged with ALPACA
Some people just prefer a token that has a higher price because they think that it is more attractive. It does not have to be SouldBound or anything. This would not increase the supply or reduce it. Is just psicologycal but people would buy it just because it is more expensive. This would consist in creating a new token that is valued at 1000 or 10000 normal ALPACA and can be interchanged. Warrant Buffet explains why he keeps the SHARES A even knowing they can be interchanged for B and represent the same value. Berkshire Hathaway Class A vs. Class B Shares: What's the Difference?

2 Likes
2

I dont understand this…Can you elaborate on the value proposition and whats the difference if you can just change them back and forth?

1 Like
3

I changed a bit the proposal but the difference is just mainly psychological.

1 Like
4

Maybe I am wrong, but the tl;dr sounds to me like this: "in order to create value for ALPACA holders, we sacrifice some of the value they will have in the future.
If we don’t give that token value, who’s going to buy it.

P.P. Venus is Binance, theh can experiment with shit and get away with it.

1 Like
5

Thanks for the interesting suggestion Martin!

In principle, I am a big proponent of using something like share issuances for Alpaca. The funds from the sale of additional Alpaca (prime) tokens can be used to accelerate the growth of the Alpaca Finance Protocol.

However, the Venus Protocol method seems very complicated to me. As I understand it, options 1 and 2 would reduce the value of existing Alpaca tokens. In return, Alpaca owners would receive new tokens. I don’t see the value in that.

Option 3 is interesting, but it would reduce participation in governance votes. I believe that the value of governance votes comes from the fact that all Alpaca owners can (and many do) vote. This is only possible with cryptocurrencies and I am reluctant to give that up.

1 Like