Hello @kpk, thanks for the response.
I have no problem with the DAO investing in the solidity and sustainability of GHO, but my point is not that. The precedent of veBAL is there: the DAO took a position on assets like BAL, which for organizational, technical, and/or any misc consideration, it was not possible to exercise on day 1 after the acquisition (not yet).
In my opinion, the DAO should not be speculating and taking unhedged positions on assets left and right, should simply acquire them with an exact strategy + timeline in mind. E.g. if not possible to execute the strategy immediately after the trade, the acquisition should not be done, or done on different terms (conditional OTC price based on market deviation, whatever).
Again, I have no problem with the incentivization of GHO liquidity, using Balancer or even AURA, but as I see it at the moment:
- The DAO spends 600k USDC buying AURA
- The DAO spends 200k of AAVE value to buy AURA.
- The DAO gets a position of 800k value in AURA, a pretty illiquid asset.
It is probably not a good idea to start incentivizing the growth of an “imbalanced” Balancer pool like GHO’s immediately until the peg gets better via the liquidity committee.
And the issue with this type of proposal is that let’s assume the objective is to pass the ARFC phase, and only do the acquisition whenever it really makes sense to apply the incentivization strategy. At that point, the price will probably be different.
Are we gonna be in a situation of setting an OTC price today and executing the trade in 1 month? Let’s step up the game and figure out a better solution.