Great discussion here so far and I love seeing the thoughtfulness in the proposal and the comments. From my perspective, I have a few points for consideration from our community and from ApeBond.
Approximately 25% Total Cost
There is a 5% initiation fee, 5% success fee, and what appears to be an average 15% discount on the tokens put up for bond purchases (based on historical averages from the ApeBond website). In short, $200,000 of potential liquidity immediately becomes $150,000 potential liquidity.
Only a 30-Day Lock Available
While the additional liquidity will be advantageous to K9, this seems to “kick the can down the road” in regards to potential sell pressure from this particular arbitrage opportunity. Not only will vesting unlock pressure be a consideration but also this bond sale, if approved, will occur shortly after the first vesting unlock when it is most likely (only my opinion) vested holders will sell to recoup their initial investment. The timing coupled with the 30-day lock could be more harmful to the project than the liquidity injection.
Opportunity Cost
We should take into consideration the treasury management proposal alongside the ApeBond proposal. While looking at treasury investments that may provide anywhere between 3%-13% APY over a year time-frame, this proposal has an immediate 25% expense.
While I appreciate ApeBond’s proposal, I am currently leaning toward this proposal not being the most efficient use of funds nor effort.
Thoughts?