Proposal: Distribution of DAO Revenue to ARB Token Holders

Proposals
21

Now we talking. Gives holders actual incentive to hold.

1 Like
22

Should also use some of the revenue to redirect to liquidity providers – this can be done with a pool gauge system.

You could also use a pool gauge voting system to distribute revenue to other dao’s/foundations.

1 Like
23

Lets do it! More incentive to invest and thrive on Arbitrum.

1 Like
24

I think the liquidity is quite deep basically everywhere. Might be a consideration if things start to get “wicky” but overall I don’t think liquidity bootstrapping is a challenge at this point in time.

Would be a strange thing to have after loaning 50m ARB to Wintermute.

3 Likes
25

The reasoning here is a bit counter-productive though – APR will tend to decrease as a pool matures and grows in liquidity, while this contrasts to opting out of revenue from distribution to delegated supply. Basically to exclude LP’s from share/revenue of protocol fees would find an equilibrium between ROI of delegating and providing liquidity; as both directly derive from tx volume. In this way you have a financial incentive that conflicts with governance participation.

Would be better to use a pool gauge voting system for distributing revenue to LP’s – this way liquidity providers can bribe voters to allocate more revenue back to preferred LP’s.

1 Like
26

100% agree. ARB holders need an extra incentive to hold tokens.

27

I don’t agree. As things are at the moment, $ARB holders have two choices:

  • Hold in wallet and use for governance
  • LP and earn a not-shabby APR.

It’s one or the other. Active governance participation has an opportunity cost at the moment. Distributing sequencer revenue to delegators will provide an incentive to governance holders (which currently they have none, price speculation aside) and create a revenue marketplace where the LP APR and sequencer APR will compete and balance each other over time.

28

This is what having pool gauges does for distributing revenue; it creates a marketplace between value of voter and value of liquidity provider in the ecosystem – done through bribes and gauge voting.

29

I get that, and I have nothing against LPers, but a little unsure why we need to complicate this with gauges & stuff when we can just incentivize LPs with more $ARB from the Ecosystem pool if it comes to that. Besides, I don’t expect sequencer revenue to be huge, probs low single digit % at max, so not sure how much will be there to argue over lol.

It’s a good idea, definitely worth exploring further. Would need to run some numbers to see if it’s worth the extra mechanics tho.

3 Likes
30

With gauge voting, it allows the dao to control reward allocation to LP’s – inturn LP providers offer bribes to get more votes towards their LP.

So this would be a way to do it as a DAO via budget management. To use gauge voting as a way to distribute revenue like a “decentralized bank”. Like Curve Finance, you can use gauges with voting for pool rewards management – but can be used for dao budgets, foundations, grants ect.

Also important that liquidity providers have some way to represent their needs with governance/revenue decisions without having to unstake/withdraw from pool. This is why pool bribes work well at giving LP providers what they mostly want, without having to pull liquidity to make the snapshot and vote for what they want.

2 Likes
31

“ARB holders will need to claim.” So, I just heard about this via this article Arbitrum’s DAO to receive over 3,350 ETH in revenue from transaction fees which referenced this tweet https://twitter.com/arbitrum/status/1656090360119017472 . The article says that this proposal states: "“Only delegated ARB tokens will be eligible for revenue distribution, and holders must claim their rewards.”

  1. I didn’t see the part about delegated ARB tokens. Is this true?
  2. This proposal just says: “ARB holders will need to claim.” How, where, and how will this information given out?
  3. why not just airdrop to users?
  4. is the tweet really a reflection of this proposal and its mechanisms? or is this tweet complete mystery with regards to how and where for redemption?
1 Like
32

O like this, only we need to SEE all de process ando is a good idea

2 Likes
33

I totally support this.
There is no governance without shared revenue.
Let’s do this! As an arb-maxi, I will be voting for this to pass. :saluting_face:

1 Like
34

I don’t know the details of the legal issues that come from setting up $ARB to give dividends to holders… from what little I do know tho it sounds like a bad idea.

A better mechanism might be to use the ETH to buy ARB (via auction or via a dex) and either burn it or give the ARB to the DAO, it would probably bring more profit to the token holders and maybe would be easier for the lawyer types to agree to.

1 Like
35

This is a great proposal and should be seriously considered.

The fact that it might be construed as a security is only a concern for American individuals. If you’re an institution you can easily hold these tokens offshore.

We should avoid making decisions with global ramifications just based on American legal frameworks.

Some other ideas for us to consider is for the DAO to do buybacks and burns or enable the feature where ARB can be utilized to fulfill transactions simply by converting the ARB to ETH within a wallet.

2 Likes
36

I support this one, sounds really great

37

i agree with you 100%.

1 Like
38

I support this proposal.

39

I second this. But instead of distributing rewards to holders, i’d prefer ‘long term holders’ who simply lock their ARBs for 1-4 years. But ofc you can lock for only 1 week but the apr will be significantly lower than those lock for 4 years. Similar to Alpaca.

40

i think its good decision for ARB community