Discussion about xALPACA in FTM

If the FTM is not in good condition for a long time. It is difficult for us to develop the FARM、HERD、and AV business. Should we consider migrating the Xalpaca of the FTM chain back to BSC.
would like to hear your opinion

2 Likes

If I understand you correctly, you want to quit on Fantom and migrate the Alpaca back to BSC?
Is Fantom Opera this bad? How often is the chain unresponsive?

I don’t think we can decide this lightly.

1 Like

It has been bad for a long time.

Hi folks. This issue has being going back and forward in my mind for weeks already since this is not the first time we got stuck on Fantom. Yes, I am worried about the future of the chain since that sudden departure of Mr. Andre C., because that was weird and it signals uncertainty about the project itself.

On the other hand, we have already put the effort to build there and to give it some growth, and maybe all this uncertainty could be solved in the next few months.

The issue with xALPACA on Fantom is a real one, since we all locked there taking in consideration our protocol growing as normal. If the AVs could not return and overall development of Alpaca on Fantom is really constrained, I would like to see the possibility of a transfer of locked ALPACA back into BNB, locked as well of course. We may even consider that Alpaca could deploy in another chain soon, as well should, and then transfer it to the new one if that is possible.

o/

2 Likes

Bridging xAlpaca to different chains seems to me with my limited technical knowledge really hard as xAlpaca is not an ERC20 token. If it’s possible it would be nice of course to give people the option. I would rather spend the dev time on something else.

A simple solution would be to implement the same early withdrawal mechanism as for BSC (when finished) and set the penalty to 0. But it’s only been a couple of days since the big crash, so let’s be patient a give it some time

4 Likes

I agree the early withdrawal mechanism will facilitate this. Good point!

1 Like

Moving forward, I would strongly suggest that Alpaca uses cross-chain gauges / staking on new chain deployments, which allows stakers to transafer their stake to different chains, effectively “arbbing-out” the yield difference.

As of last month, Anycall bridge started to provide cross-chain function call service, in which Curve started using. The use case for Alpaca is similar to Curve and we may be able to take reference from the implementation.

Reference:

4 Likes

If it´s not working out I´m all for moving on, but there is something I don´t understand.

DeFi is thriving on Fantom. Apps are migrating to or starting on Fantom. Foundation got a lot of criticism and it seems like they start to listen. Based on this I do not see how Fantom could be that bad.

Sure it had a hard time and got a lot of FUD, but is the protocol itself that bad? Is there a guarantee that other EVM chains will perform better in the long run?

1 Like

Its good idea.This will not affect the development progress of the team.

Whether FTM will have a good future, no one can know. But it is difficult for team to expand new business at present(just my personal opinion). Time and energy are precious. It is better to look in other places or directions

I always felt this was the best way, not sure how the team would think about it

In my humble opinion, this would be treason… it doesn’t look good getting rid of a partner. If fantom is so bad now, perhaps the decision to include it in Alpaca was not the right one or it was not studied thoroughly. Anyway the “ruin” is full of good intentions.

1 Like

I’m stuck with xAlpaca on Fantom.

I support the idea. Give the opportunity to withdraw Alpaca without penalty.

I am very happy staking Alpaca on FTM chain. Their recently update has greatly lower gas fee and this chain’s transaction seem much faster lately.