Let’s discuss if we want to use fees to buyback and burn KACY to lower its total supply and therefore increasing its value.
I propose to create a script that will buyback and burn the exact amount of KACY that has been sold. For example someone sells 50 KACY, the script immediately buys 50 KACY and sends to the null address. If there is not enough fees to buyback KACY that has been sold use all fees wee have.
This should be automated by a script instead of human interaction so no one has advantage to manipulate KACY price.
This will teach people that selling KACY only makes it more valuable therefore we will fight sell pressure, making the sell bots suffer and motivating to hold KACY.
The Kacy distribution is still not finished and the total number of Kacy’s at the end of the distribution doesn’t really seem high to me.
So I’m not in favour of a buy back today in general and if this mechanism was to be implemented, I think it’s too early for that.
I am also against this proposal at this stage. I think it’s a good idea once the protocol is generating significant revenue, so we can make the buybacks sustainable. Till then, the best way to use the time of devs is to allow them to laser focus on building kickass decentralized ETF infrastructure.
To reduce sell pressure, I would suggest building gauges for ETFs to introduce a strong $KACY use case around protocol utility and decreasing or removing incentives for LPs. More on that here:
Iike the idea of stablishing a script, but I think it should be sustainable and imune to manipulations.
Maybe we could stabljsh this policy:
Every month the protocol decides how much of the fees is going to be bought back based on the average of fees of the last 3 months.
This amount would be bought in x numbers of transactions, randomly triggered, over the next month.
the kacys bought back could be split. For example, 30% burned, 70% redistributed to stakes (we could use that to fix the situation of the 45 days lock yeild).
There was quite a discussion on this topic over discord. The main takeaways:
Programmed buybacks are vulnerable to “sandwich attacks”
It would be quite hard to do stealth buybacks in a trustless way
There are not that much fees collected yet
This proposal would require some kind of development
And given the partial results, doesn’t seem to me that our community is 100% with this proposal either.
So I’d suggest letting this idea on hold.
All of the fees collected will be over the DAO governance, and while buyback and burn is definitely an option, there are other options too. If someone wants to propose a grant for something using those fees, we can vote on it. If the time came and we want to do a buyback, we always can.
I am totally against any burn of Kacy, instead the fees should be used to compensate early holders for the emotional pains they have borne right from when Kacy price dropped from $3 to current $0.08, I think we deserve that appreciation for still believing on Kacy and the team up till now.