Somthing was brought up in discord about slippage issues:
For one that can be mitigated overtime by fees and farming compounding, we also dont have to deposit the entire amount all at once. It could be built up over a while before the experiment starts.
Imo one of the things Tinyman Governance should be good as is doing things like willing to bootstrap new LPs that are important to Tinyman, with us even willing to take a slight initial hit to be recouped overtime so the rest of the community is encoraged to add their own liquidity.
I’m personally already committed to backing wbtc/tiny for the forseable future. I started the LP, and currently hold 7.73% of the pool myself.
I would also like to add to clear up a misunderstanding of LPs:
One-sided liquidity deposits are not a thing on Tinyman. As in any deposits into tiny LPs from treasury assets are swapped 50/50 for the other asset:
Example: we add 1,000 Tiny to Tiny/usdc, as a one-sided add, half of it is swapped for USDC, with the end result being 500/tiny + value in USDC added to the pool to keep a 50/50 ratio.
Yes this does mean a slight loss of tiny initially but at these values it’s miniscule. Especially considering this would hopefully be a long-term hold for us as a platform, we would easily recoup any initial lose via fees and farming rewards.
The goal for the initial pilot is to effectively be revenue-neutral after some farming cycles and a net gain for us after that, especially as compounding from farming rewards and fees build up overtime.
This pilot could sit and compound for months, a year or two even, building up strong stability and a large pool of funds for us. In a bull-run occasional drawdowns of some wBTC could happen to buffer Tiny income, and even ear-marked by governance for future platform development.