Do you have any alternatives in mind with similar risk/reward ratios?
While I do agree with the sentiment that regulations may change - making requirements on stablecoins more stringent - I don’t see it happening suddenly overnight.
Also, personally, I don’t know any alternatives which are of similar risk profile.
The reason for diversification from non-stable coins into stable is exactly because they are unstable. And any stable coins will always be in government’s cross-sights as they are creating a direct competition to government’s controlled FIAT.
So prudent strategy is to diversify among different types of assets, watch them all closely and adjust as necessary - which K9 seem to be doing pretty well at the moment and doing exactly that right now.
Once USDT/USDC situation starts to change - I’m sure we won’t be sitting idly either.
My issue with most coins is the, how can I put it respectively… Minimalist way to generate a profit. But the margins are actually so miniscule, it’s almost better to put it into a Lemonade stand at your neighborhoods corner. I am trying to be as nice as possible. I have been in this scene for a few years and I haven’t seen much happen other than launches. And every new coin that comes out has the exact same formula of any TV show.
What I am saying is: maybe we should venture into capital based equity. Which means paperwork, obligations, insurance, accountants, and so on and so forth. I do not see a sizable return coming our way for putting money into the other coins. All of the coins seem to be mimicking each other. Almost like a game of Tag, king of the hill, or a baton race. It (the money) just keeps getting passed through one coin into the next. Each has its own filter or siphon (a redundancy). There are no gains other than the sale of the coins. So with that in mind I believe K9 should be putting their currency to a capital backed security instead of a coin based security. That’s my opinion on this matter.
The purpose of the Treasury is to preserve the DAO’s capital.
It’s not meant to be an investment vehicle.
The primary returns for the DAO are meant to be generated from its products and services.
What you are describing sounds more like turning the DAO into a VC fund.
I don’t believe that when you factor in the cost of “paperwork, obligations, insurance, accountants, and so on and so forth” which you rightly mentioned - the return for such investments will prove to be superior given current size of our capital.
From what I understand this is not where the main expertise of the team lies. We should be concentrating on obtaining maximum returns utilising our strengths i.e. building.
And this is exactly what the Treasury is for - to keep money safe - to fund new developments - not to be frozen in a ‘lemonade stand’ which can potentially shoot to the moon if the conditions are right but might also take years to sell if markets go south. In my understanding the risk is just too great and not worth the potential extra yield.
Once we grow huge and have excessive profits idling - then it would be a very different question though - and opening a VC branch of the DAO may become a prudent decision to diversify. We are not quite there yet though.
This is all hinging and pivoting on the adoption and use case scenarios surrounding all coins. All of the math in the background for our DAO is trying to separate, yet utilize some mechanics, from modern banks; centered around accountability. I just do not see this going well when we keep hitting too many bumps that force a decision.
Especially since the use case of this coin is for liquidity in the sale for coins through shibarium. I wonder if it were to become the choice for “transacting” what the fee structure would hold and how competitive it would remain to be. Which would ultimately lead to capital backed securities. I believe we should take the route of this as soon as possible instead of waiting to get there. We may not have enough practice now, but no experience means we would be entering the woods with someone who is only book smart and not wise. If we started now with someone who was booksmart and could obtain even the smallest amount of capital it would be better than starting much later on with nothing more than a degree.
Honestly, I have no idea what you are talking about here.
We haven’t hit any ‘bumps that force a decision’. The roadmap is being completed ahead of time and going very smoothly.
‘The use case of this coin’ doesn’t specify what coin exactly you are talking about. But neither KNINE token nor USDC/USDT tokens which are subject of this proposal serve as ‘liquidity in the sale for coins through Shibarium’.
KNINE is the K9 Finance DAO governance token. While USDC/USDT are stablecoins.
We have just started moving along our roadmap and doing it successfully - yet you sign it off as a failure already - even before the first product is launched in 2 days.
I’d like to think that all of this is simply a language barrier not letting you to express what you really mean. But it seems to me more likely that you are simply trolling with your messages not grounded in reality.