@eboado Spot on comments, please find our answers below.
We totally agree with you on this note. Though we weren’t involved in this process and can only comment from information we gathered in the forum, the inability to execute the veBAL strategy on time seems to derive from the classic overfitting problem: early automation of an unknown and fairly volatile process.
We hope that the GHO Liquidity Committee—which we firmly believe should extend its mandate beyond GHO e.g. AAVE—will bring a swifter approach to this activity.
The strategy is already outlined in this proposal. As for the timeline, the GHO Liquidity Committee should be standing by to strategically deploy those assets within the Balancer ecosystem as soon as they get acquired.
We agree, but we anticipate that closing the spread between GHO’s Borrow Rate and EDSR & Maker/Spark Borrow Rates along with the additional demand generated by the incentivised Balancer pools will be suffice to reestablish GHO’s parity with USD.
It’s also relevant to notice that these initiatives carry a significant bureaucratic process, and if ratified by Aave DAO, we’d still need to go through Aura DAO community approval. For the sake of efficiency, it’s important to execute in parallel streams to be ready to deploy when the right time comes.
We reckon the inefficiency of D2D deals and would try to execute as quickly as possible. Ultimately, we believe that any price volatility throughout the process would be negligible compared to the long-term benefit of such an investment.