Proposal to burn faster from treasury

Hi, since there was so many withdraw and sells on alpaca on chain last 3 weeks, i think we should consider burning more from treasury

Treasury has 900k $ and we only use 20K $ For alpaca burn weekly
This means 45 weeks to burn , and treasury is growing ever day

The burning number of alpaca seems constant but $ value always down

So i proposal to use 100k$ weekly buyback from treasury

Since price is also cheap now, more supply will be burned if we don’t wait 45 weeks!
Cheers!

2 Likes

Maybe we could create a system, like 10% or 5% of treasury will be used every week.
We need to give people some confidence during the cold winter, right? Only 35k burning a week can’t make things happen.

Personally, I used to agree with the sentiment that burning Alpaca faster is better, I had even bugged @Samsara multiple times on Discord via private messages to hurry the burning up!

However, since then I have come to realize that the current method of burning might be the safest. We are burning just enough Alpaca to ensure we are “deflationary”, which is great for marketing purposes. Furthermore, we are hedging against the market in case of further down turns since the funds are mostly in stablecoins. If the market improves, our valuation will naturally go up, if the market goes down, we have a consistent buy pressure to ensure prices don’t fall too low. Another side benefit of spreading out the buybacks is that we are mitigating any chance of front runs or “sandwich attacks”.

If my proposal goes through, the liquidation treasury will also start earning a yield with the funds that will power further burns in the future.

Lastly, although the current method works quite well, I also agree with @pest’s idea of potentially using a fixed percentage or amount of liquidation treasury funds per week, especially once the inflation goes down and we may be self-sustainably deflationary. I believe a strategy such as ~5% or $20k of treasury funds, whichever is greater per week is a good starting point for discussion.

4 Likes