I agree that this is important, so I think it’s worth considering increasing the percentage to at least 3% per year. The final amount of 5% of all treasuries in stablecoins seems small to me.
1 Like
Voted FOR this proposal. I particularly like the evolution of the compensation structure to include the 3 year vesting.
In addition to the “endowment”, it would be great to see a Stables spending fund for maybe yearly/semestrely DAO expenses.
With a recent proposal, we’re having to do A LOT of coordiantion with the MSS and AF around swaping Arb tokens and inclued a 30% buffer which almost wasnt enough and stressed about potentially having to cancel or ask the DAO for more money. All that could be refactored away from individual proposals.
1 Like
I voted AGAINST following my reasoning in my previous comment.
LobbyFi has voted AGAINST the proposal for the following reason:
through the internal community auction, the LobbyFi users that bid against the proposal have overweighted those that were for the proposal (in this particular case, none has voted in favor).
1 Like
I support the proposal with the following additional comments and suggestions to optimise some of the details in its implementation:
I. Reasons for support:
1, Diversification of funds is necessary: as a low-risk, highly liquid investment, RWA (Real World Assets) can effectively balance the risk of continuous fluctuations in ARB and ensure the stability and long-term growth of DAO’s funds.
2. STEP 1 has practical results: from the data of the first phase, some gains have indeed been made after the funds were allocated to RWA, and some protocols have been promoted for development on Arbitrum at the same time.
3. Enhancement of ecological competitiveness: more RWA projects are attracted to join Arbitrum through the STEP programme, which can further enhance the competitive advantages of the ecology.
II. Suggestions:
1 Transparency of liquidation of ARBs: It is recommended that DAO clarify and publish the plan before liquidation, such as the timetable for liquidation in batches, target price range, etc., to avoid negative impact on the market.
2 Strengthening community supervision: the committee has more power, and it is recommended to add community representatives or a third-party independent supervision mechanism to ensure that the distribution of funds is more transparent and fair.
3 Balance ecological support: It is recommended that while investing in RWA, a portion of the funds should be set aside to support Arbitrum’s local ecological projects, such as the construction of DeFi, NFT and Layer 2 infrastructure.
4 Dynamic Adjustment of Strategy: RWA market is changing rapidly, it is recommended to review the funding strategy regularly and adjust it dynamically according to market opportunities and ecological needs.
I also put in an Against bid for the 891.5k ARB of voting power available in lobbyfi.xyz to vote Against in this offchain proposal Arbitrum One Transaction Hash (Txhash) Details | Arbitrum One
This bid ended up winning the auction and the LobbyFi vote was casted as Against. But, as I said above, I personally voted For on this offchain proposal. Non-Constitutional: Stable Treasury Endowment Program 2.0 - #62 by paulofonseca
1 Like
Thanks @paulofonseca for taking the time to also document this!
We can confirm that Paulo was one of the bidders Against the proposal and ended up winning the auction along with the other bidder(s).
1 Like
I’m voting FOR this proposal after carefully weighing the pros and cons. While I acknowledge some concerns raised about potential overlap with the Treasury Management Committee initiative or OpCo, I’ve decided to support this proposal. Although it may not be a perfect solution, it provides a path towards financial sustainability for the DAO and leverages the expertise of a proven team. I believe that RWA represent a crucial investment opportunity and are key to the long-term stability and appeal of the ecosystem.
Besides that, I agree with @Jojo that this should be the last iteration of the STEP program in its current form. Moving forward, we should focus on developing a well-structured handover plan that ensures the necessary expertise is retained - whether through OpCo, TMC, or an alternative solution.
1 Like
Considering that this strategy has been previously validated and that an improvement in the DAO’s stability and sustainability is expected, I vote in favor on Snapshot. Likewise, it would be beneficial to explore more decentralized solutions, utilizing on-chain tools to maximize Arbitrum’s innovative capacity.
gm, voted FOR.
- I agree with @DisruptionJoe—this was a well-executed program.
A lot of great wins, as v1 seemed to have contributed significantly to attracting new blue-chip protocols to Arbitrum. I also appreciated the dashboards and reports being published. - Agree this should be the final term for the STEP committee.
- Love that parts of the compensation are streamed over a longer time horizon.
On the distribution, I’d advocate allocating part of the budget towards non-T-BILLS (both US and non-US assets) whenever possible. While this comes with a different risk profile, it aligns with encouraging a diverse set of innovations on Arbitrum.
2 Likes
The following reflects the views of L2BEAT’s governance team, composed of @krst and @Sinkas, and it’s based on the combined research, fact-checking, and ideation of the two.
We’re voting FOR the proposal.
The first iteration of STEP was a good first step towards a more streamlined approach to diversifying our treasury and expanding it by allocating more money and opening it up to more providers makes sense.
We have discussed STEP (both 1.0 and 2.0) with Devansh quite a lot over the past few months, and we appreciate the work he’s put into the proposal, particularly in addressing some of the concerns and things we’ve brought up in our discussions.
We are aware of the comment that some other delegates have raised about STEP falling under the scope of the TMC/GM established with the Treasury Management proposal. Although we generally agree, we do not think that now is the right time to do that. STEP should continue as a standalone program for the time being while the TMC and GM focus on other areas and potentially fall under their scope down the line.
One last thing we’d like to raise and open a discussion about is that we would like to see Arbitrum leverage the service providers we’re engaging with for more than just using their services. That could come in the form of additional marketing for Arbitrum or ecosystem growth (e.g. by whitelisting Arbitrum protocols to be able to use tokenized t-bills as lending collateral). STEP 2.0 is a great opportunity to explore more of those opportunities and how we can leverage them.
3 Likes
Blockworks Advisory will be voting FOR this proposal on Snapshot.
We were pleased with the first STEP, and after seeing the first few reports from Steakhouse we believe that a continuation is warranted. While STEP does fall within the mandate of the TMC/GM, based on past performance and the standard of execution to which STEP has shown, we do not think that it would be a good idea to discontinue STEP.
1 Like
As stated above, I’ll always think treasury diversity is important. I think this has (and will continue to) be a good step to achieve that goal. I also appreciate that there has been reporting to show that there has been success with the first iteration.
As others have mentioned, with the passing of other treasury diversification projects this now creates some redundancies… however I think that this project is more then simple treasury diversification at the end of the day. Its about supporting an RWA market. So in some sense I think it is a little unique in that role. I’d also contend that those projects are still relatively new, so keeping this running will present an opportunity for a soft transition if you will.
All that said, between the first iteration being relatively successful and what I perceive as a continued need for diversification in the moment, I will be voting “for” this project to continue.
1 Like
We vote FOR the proposal on Snapshot.
We appreciate Devan and the committee members for their diligent executions and reporting in the initial STEP. The estimated annual yield, $875k from the $30 million endowment isn’t particularly impressive, but it should have played a good role in the Arbitrum RWA ecosystem. On condition that this is the last term of the STEP, considering other treasury diversification programs are planned, we support the continuation of the program with a great selection of the established actors in the committee and a reasonable budget.
1 Like
As in @web3citizenxyz representation, voting FOR in this proposal. Below the rationale:
DAOplomats voted FOR this proposal on Snapshot.
The cohort one was solid. It had many positives. The idea of diversifying the treasury, and exploring RWA is still net positive for the DAO, so it was easy to support this second installment of the program.
1 Like
Thanks for the ~unanimous vote of support for the STEP program!
We appreciate delegates recognizing the success of the first program and renewing our mandate for a second version. We are in agreement with the feedback that this should be the last time we hold STEP with the same committee members.
We have updated the proposal to keep a slightly shorter timeline, added @steakhouse as an observing member of the STEP committee in their role as program manager and also uploaded the RFP under which applicants would need to apply.
We will keep this up for a week to get a final round of feedback before uploading to Tally next week on January 28th. Thanks for all the improvements and making this a smooth process!
1 Like
After consideration, the @SEEDgov delegation has decided to “FOR” on this proposal at the Snapshot Vote.
Rationale
From our perspective, STEP is one of the best-executed programs within the DAO.
Several strong points allow us to continue trusting the team designated for this task:
- The choice of Service Providers, including web2 institutions like Blackrock and web3-native entities like Mountain and Ondo among the selected ones, demonstrates not only reliable criteria but also a strategic deployment of funds between reputable actors from different sectors.
- The dashboard was handy for tracking the funds’ evolution, although we would add more on-chain info for each holding and more details of the transactions made, providing greater clarity on the dates each investment was executed, the current location of the funds, etc.
- The reporting has also been useful, though it would be reasonable to observe the intra-month variations of each holding more easily. For instance, to observe the addition of TBILLs from OpenEden, one must compare the reports from November and December as there is no written mention or graphical indication. Despite this, the periodic updates on changes to the backing of each asset are highly valuable information.
- The estimated budget costs seem reasonable, considering that less time will be required to review applications from service providers who already participated in STEP 1.
- As expressed by @L2Beat, perhaps in the future, this work could fall under the scope of the TMC and GM, all within a comprehensive Treasury Management strategy that we hope the OpCo will develop in coordinating these initiatives. Meanwhile, STEP has proven its value and should continue, as these precedents will aid in developing the mentioned plan, providing the DAO with experience, links to service providers, and a clear framework for executing the strategy.
To expand on the current board’s criteria, we highlight the transparency and reasonability for rejecting applicants:
All these points speak to the committee’s due diligence before approving or rejecting a Service Provider, which we highly value.
We hope they continue on the same path, prioritizing the security and liquidity of the invested assets.
Hi all,
Confirming the AF address as 0x54FE3425f09854E15081fa5B3276afCB4C46FCa2 for receiving the funds.
3 Likes
LobbyFi’s rationale on the price and making this proposal available after its activation for on-chain voting
As the result of this proposal, the DAO would roughly earn in a year: 35.000.000 (ARBs invested) * 0,6 (correct price of ARB) * 0,04 (% yearly) = $840.000.
Since the snapshot proposal went through with 135m+ of votes in favor and the quorum is at 121m ARB on-chain, we expect this proposal to go though relatively easily with or without LobbyFi’s support + we do not expect that LobbyFi will block it or prevent the proposal from hitting the quorum - hence low risk of us selling the voting power on this overall.
Based on this input + financial benefit the DAO treasury gets within a year, we will set the instant buy price for this at 1% of that; so approx 2.5 ETH but would not expect it to be bought in the end. We would expect it to be sold via community auction (which we will turn on), yet the volume would also most probably not be too high since there is nothing controversial about the proposal + the DAO is the direct beneficiary in a sense.
2 Likes