Hi community! I’m a long term holder of the GNO token and am excited to participate in the DAO.
A big reason that the GNO token is underperforming when compared to other DeFi tokens such as UNI, SNX, or LINK is that there is not currently a widely understood mechanism to accrue value to the GNO token.
I suggest that the community rally behind a value accrual mechanism for the GNO token by having users that use the GNO Safe pay a fee.
This fee should come from usage. Perhaps the users of the GNO safe can pay the fee in ETH, USDC, or a currency of their choice. The paid fee should then be sent to the market to buy up GNO and burn it.
Without a value accrual mechanism, a competitor to GNO could come out of the woodwork and take the majority of the market share for Safes. I really respect and enjoy using the GNO safe for a very significant amount of capital and am appalled that I am not charged a fee for using it.
To see how a competitor is a threat to the GNO ecosystem, see how SUSHI has been attracting liquidity away from Uniswap due to their liquidity incentive programs.
Hi. Thanks for your proposal. I do agree that a form of cash-flow would be something useful for GNO value accrual. But the first obvious concerns that come to mind with adding a fee to the Safe are:
Wouldn’t fees drive users away?
What stops someone from just forking a fee-less Safe?
I don’t think multisigs are the kind of business where fees are viable. This would drive people to other projects or even have them fork it.
Contrary to AMM like Uniswap, multisigs do not have significant networks effects making user retention quite hard when a better product (in this case a fork without fees) is available.
I think a better use of the token would be to use a harberger tax system for the display of modules/compatible dapps. Projects wanting to appear high in the list of dapps would burn GNO. The safe interface would display dapps according to the amount of fees paid over a particular period.
I’m not sure that would work due to the way I think the community uses the SAFE’s. This may just be the fund I am associated with, but we almost exclusively use WalletConnect to do all interactions with dApps.
The best token system is one where the token holders get the benefits of more people using the ecosystem. Perhaps staking GNO tokens would get you lower fees for the SAFE. Perhaps we could institute a fee like Yearn had where there is a fee when a user withdraws from a SAFE.
In that case, the token would have 2 uses with SAFEs. 1. lower fees depending on how many GNO you have. 2. fees from the protocol would go out and buy up GNO from the market and burn it. Those two mechanisms together could start to get a community excited about GNO.
Ultimately what we as a community need to do is to spark excitement in the token itself. The products that Gnosis has built are exceptional. The biggest thing the ecosystem is lacking is exceptional tokenomics and a community that loves the token.
The risks that Gnosis would be forked are always present whether the project has good tokenomics or not. Having good tokenomics affords the development team another moat to ward off competitors that would seek to fork the protocol.