its not even close,look at the BTC chart from the bottom and calculate the difference and then the difference between circulating/total supply out and i dont care who has what in $GNO, this is straight theft for $STAKE hodlers
2 Likes
Xdai has done so much created so many things 5 yrs no one thought was possible , I spend almost any minute i don’t work and sleep w/ crypto and not only will the fund be deep but what is to prevent splitting the chain and having xdai1 or xdai2 / This is getting greedy with what the banks have done for years and it’s setting a future precedence , if a really great project comes out and a bigger project wants to steal it what will prevent it from buying 50% ( which on the 4 spike occasions 200% pops may be what happened with xdai ) My point is if people from xdai are not happy with this do to loss of a long lost chain that’s had love from day one till this day and gettting so little from gno per xdai is just some straight bullshit . Has anyone looked into legal issues , if you are buying the chain out could that check a few boxes showing it’s a security ? There is too much too fast and gno is offering far too little , I owned gno , but may on this dip buy every dollar i have of xdai which is only maybe 10k more but use everyone to get a fair proposal and time to see the long term problems . HOSTILE TAKEOVER are strong words and indicates. a non decentralized entity is taking over the chain by force , this will set future presidents and we do not want to be on the wrong side of crypto history.
3 Likes
The tokens have to be newly minted, might even be necessary to make a new contract to make this possible. The main idea behind this is to facilitate a real merger and not a plain take over. $Stake holders don’t feel happy with any conversion rate that’s accaptable to Gnosis, therefor I don’t see a solution by adjusting the exchange rate.
But I see the value in the merger and would be happy if this would happen.
The way I proposed it Gnosis don’t have to spend upfront GNO token which the $Stake holders don’t value the same way as Gnosis, and $Stake holders retain a larger part of the project. Imho a win-win.
But ofc there are more details to talk about, like vesting scedule for the tokens they will receive, also if it might be better to offer a little less so that no party holds more than 50% to keep the narrative of decentralisation. And most likely other things I am not aware of right now.
Anyway, I would favor this much more as any conversion rate adjustment.
1 Like
That would actually be a useful solution
I think this could be a way forward. Would like to know the opinion of Gnosis people here
2 Likes
Gnosis Chain will become best of block chain, I very glad to join the project!
1 Like
why not buy xdai instead of combin, because change rate is not accept by xdai group members?
1 Like
sad to see xDAI name go, although I voted YES.
@mkoeppelmann I think this is a huge chance for Gnosis and xDai, even if the ratio could be a bit better - renegotiation would be appropriate imo (e. g. 1:0.06 ratio => 0.032 directly + 0.028 with linear vesting schedule over 12 month). I would love to see how Gnosis-Chain would become an Ethereum Alpha-Network with an implementation of a Dai-Sidechain-Module to generate Dai/xDai directly on Gnosis-Chain (atm there are validator multisig-security concerns as far as I know - but Gnosis-Beacon-Chain should fix this issue). Btw. I really like the Idea of subsidizing the bridging costs - you mentioned in the proposal. This would be a real competitive advantage over other chains (+ marketing) - maybe half of the tip fee could be used.
1 Like
If this is hostile and xdai holders don’t agree it sets a standard that any small project can be gobbled up by say egos with billions of eth , what 6.5 billion for a decentralized ( but need a license like facebook ) MAKES MY 9 YRS OF STUDYING CRYPTO AND DECENTRALIZATION REALIZE THAT 14 COINS WAS BETTER IN 2012 THEN 150000 NOW .
1 Like
always the same in mankind history: with success comes the money to ruin the morals.
1 Like
As a GNO holder and xDAI dapp creator (Kleros & Linguo), I would support the merge but I do not think that the current price is fair for GNO holders.
Stake currently trades at 0.024 STAKE / GNO while the proposal fix the rate at 0.033, a 37% markup.
The issue of fixing a price that fast is that it will inevitably result in one side overpaying.
Here the weird thing is that by looking at the comments it seems that STAKE holders are complaining while this proposal would swap their STAKE at a premium.
A way forward would be to instead of setting a fix price in the proposal, create a method to calculate this price.
We could for example make a prediction market on the price of STAKE and GNO assuming the proposal doesn’t pass and take that to compute the exchange rate.
Also I’d support the merge if it is also widely supported on the xDAI side. As if it’s just something like 51-49 with the 49 minority being highly hostile, it would lead to bad community ecosystem unlikely to yield good results.
1 Like
I like to draw your attention to a snapshot vote (excuse the typos, pls) that I did to catch the opinion of the $Stake holders about the proposal.
Most important to notice: not even one vote was against the merger at all.
Otherwise, it is a mixed outcome. 34 addresses voted with a power of 120,9 k $Stake, so participation clearly could have been better. Some voters couldn’t vote with all their holding in full because it was locked in some protocols not eligible for snapshot voting. If this might affects voters differently and thereby had an effect on the results cannot be said.
Although majority of voting power (65,6k out of 120,9k or 54,26%) as well as unique addresses (28 out of 34 or 77,7%) favor a merger without exchanging $Stake for $Gno to overcome the establishment of an exchange ratio, imho this can’t be regarded as the sole possibility taking into account the limitations mentioned above.
But it clearly emphasises the need to work on some modification of the merger conditions, whereby the path described in the proposal can be regarded as one way to go if no other consent can be reached.
I am curious about other suggestions and hope it will turn out well for all of us.
1 Like
that is a disingenuous way of framing it. by reading the stake holders concerns the issue is not the convert in value. but the lost investment opportunity many long term holders have been waiting for of stake going from a low cap gem to a mid or high cap. with this merge they lose out on that opportunity and go to being a high cap with no worth while return. most do not wish to trade their possible 100x return for a more reliable 10x, especially with the time and community investment put in. not to mention this vote dramatically reduces the stake they hold in the eco system they have been apart of, as the lose in percentage of the overall ecosystem (which is about 80% minimum) would in turn reduce their voting power and influence. so no, i completely disagree with your take and saying this is a bad deal to gno holders, especially as gno holders are really happy with this offer, is laughable.
2 Likes
After discussions with various Stake token holders.
The 2 most concrete amendments of the proposal could be
-
If a DAO would form that is controlled by current projects on xDAI some of the GNO for growth incentives could be delegated to this DAO. This DAO would have the mission to use the GNO only for growth incentives of Gnosis Chain but could establish an independent process of allocating those.
-
Guaranteed Stake/ETH ratio
The current proposal suggests a GNO/Stake ratio of 0.0326292707 GNO/STAKE. In addition to that GnosisDAO could guarantee a minimum Stake/ETH ratio.
At the time of writing the Stake/ETH price is: 0.00242 - we are suggesting to guarantee a ratio of 0.003915512484 which would be >50% bonus over the current spot price.Practically that should be achieved by making sure GNO trades at least at 0.12 ETH (thus 0.12 * 0.0326292707 = 0.003915512484) This can be achieved by using the ETH reserved of GnosisDAO to buy back GNO till this price is reached.
11 Likes
As a Stake and GNO holder I would make the following suggestion.
Keep the .0326GNO/STAKE price and take 20% of the 150K ETH and offer it to STAKE holders.
This would make this deal (check my numbers)
30000ETH/8763000STAKE ~= .00342ETH/STAKE or
(.0326GNO/STAKE + .00342ETH/STAKE) instead of your .0039155.GNO/STAKE
This only drops the GnosisDAO treasury by 20% from 150K ETH to 120K ETH. Gives a reasonable bonus in ETH to STAKE holders to approve the merger rather than wasting the ETH to accomplish a temporary GNO price bump.
This at least gets the merger/buyout price to something more like $23-26/STAKE vs. $11-13/STAKE currently (depending on the GNO price on any given day).
I think this kind of deal gives STAKE holders more incentive to sell the ETH and hold the GNO (though hard to say) or even maybe to use the ETH THEMSELVES to buy more GNO if they believe in the merger.
6 Likes
I think the approach Maker Man stated is way better. It would be more benefitial for both projects. I totally agree with Maker Man.
mkoeppelmann that would value $stake at around 17$, which is the same price as the original proposal you offered us, at the gno price of that moment. So you are actually not changing the ratio, just trying to camuflate it as an improvement while it is not
3 Likes
I personally like the amendments and I think it is a really nice gesture.
3 Likes
Nice idea, imho as a STAKE holder full support (I mean, bags speaking, but #1 is also smart)
1 Like
Perfect! Love it. The commitment to hold GNO peg either through a commitment to buy back or through ETH distribution the way @MakerMan suggested is key IMO. As a large STAKE stakeholder, I am in favour of this amended proposal.
2 Likes