There are already 5 different bridging proposals on this forum, and all of them fail to explain how they generate growth on ARbitrum or actually expand the ecosystem.
Subsidising bridging does not actually bring more innovation to the ecosystem.
People need to have a reason to bridge in the first place… this is why incentives should be used on protocols that are offering unique apps. If there was nothing to use on ARbitrum, then no one would bridge. A bridge is just a middle-man and at the moment is already very cheap and fast.
No, this will be funds incentivized by the ARB grant. Think of current bridging as Uni V2 and this grant being used to incentivise LPs in a Uni V3-like concentrated liquidity model. It’ll make quotes much tighter and improve bridging time.
Regarding the grant breakdown, could you provide some further clarity.
“500k ARB will be used to support these projects and their users bridging to and from Arbitrum. Gas rebates, fee rebates and other incentives will reward these partners and give their users additional incentives to use the Arbitrum ecosystem.”
Is there a % in mind for these rebates?
I don’t understand the value of (3) in the grant breakdown. “Loyalty” can be gamed by creating a new address? What type of grants will be given for new tokens/projects? Some more info here would be helpful.
Other contracts will include those of external swap pools specifically on GMX, Uniswap, and Velodrome. Immediate scope will look at stableswap pairs (USDC/USDT/USDC.e/DAI).
The spending plan for the above is 800k/2m will go towards Synapse contracts (100k to the bridge/300k to the minichef and 400k to the concentrated liquidity pool). All rewards will be distributed evenly from the day of distribution to 6 months later.
Grants is a mischaracterization on my part here. Synapse Protocol works with many partner projects who need liquidity incentives for their tokens to be bridgeable. This program seeks to relieve those specific pressures.
Rebates for bridge transactions are better as a fraction of the total fee + slippage. The goal of this is to decrease the delta between what a user deposits and what they withdraw.
With regards to your concerns around (3) the general idea is to encourage loyal users to continue to be power users and not churn/ leave the ecosystem. Creating new addresses does not game the system because things like the age of the address / methods to determine how organic an address is are helpful.
In terms of “grants” for new tokens and projects I briefly address this in my response to Matt above but outside of liquidity incentives for different tokens, incentivizing liquidity for external stableswaps/routers is mutually beneficial.
Currently we support these protocols in a few ways. First, we are the primary bridge partner for all of these projects. both GMX and gOHM can only be bridged through Synapse, and Synapse is one of Frax’s limited bridge partners. Bridge volume for these tokens is > $500m to date for these tokens.
Furthermore, there are also smart contract integrations that enable swaps on these protocols to happen before and after bridging events. This increases touchpoints for protocols and improves the user experience Imagine not only receiving the desired output token (any token you want) but also discovering reliable protocols when first onboarding into the ecosystem. Here is an example of this in action: Arbitrum Transaction Hash (Txhash) Details | Arbiscan
Now that your application has been marked eligible, please be advised of the remaining steps in the application process to be completed prior to the Review Period Deadline:
Please complete the following steps required for your application to proceed to Snapshot:
To change your proposal to final, please tag an Arbitrum Foundation Forum Moderator (@ stonecoldpat @ cliffton.eth @ eli_defi) by the Review Period deadline to notify them of your proposal’s readiness to proceed from [Draft] to [Final] status.
Once notified, the Arbitrum Foundation Forum Moderator will adjust your title from [Draft] to [Final] status. Once marked as [FInal], your application post will be locked by moderators and you will no longer be able to edit your proposal.
Firstly, thank you for your proposal and your evident commitment to the Arbitrum ecosystem.
Introduction and Rationale
Synapse is seeking a grant of 2,000,000 ARB to enhance their asset bridging capabilities on Arbitrum. Already a strong presence with 40% of its TVL on Arbitrum, Synapse aims to make asset transfers faster and more cost-effective. Their proven track record of facilitating $8bn in total volume and engaging around 200,000 users on Arbitrum speaks volumes. We believe the proposal aligns well with Arbitrum’s broader goals, offering tangible benefits like gas and fee rebates to new users and developers.
Concern Regarding Grant Size
The grant request is on the high side given the current budget constraints
Our recommendation for change: Consider lowering the grant request to better align with available funding and other initiatives within the Arbitrum ecosystem.
Castle Capital values the efforts Synapse has put forth and the services it offers to the Arbitrum ecosystem. We are inclined to support the proposal, contingent upon the lowering of the grant size to better fit within the current budget constraints.
Our recommendations can be summarized as follows:
Consider lowering the grant request
We hope our feedback helps fine-tune your proposal and that it’s received as constructive input for the benefit of everyone involved in Arbitrum’s growth.