NidhiDAO
Published in

NidhiDAO

GURU and NidhiDAO Reborn?

A vote…

We are proposing a vote between the following 3 options:

Option 1 — Shut down. Nidhi treasury is liquidated and distributed to holders, GURU and NidhiDAO cease to exist.

Option 2 — A pivot and rebirth:

  • The GURU token is reborn as the TNGBL token
  • Nidhi DAO is merged with Tangible DAO
  • There will be a token swap 1:1 from GURU to TNGBL

Option 3 — Continue on as we are.

Background

NidhiDAO is an OHM fork, with a treasury of real world assets via TNFTs enabled by a partnership with Tangible.store. The change in market conditions have led us to believe that the token model is not sustainable for this specific use case. The main purpose of NidhiDAO was to drive demand for TNFTs, this is why it was initially ideated and built.

Over the past few weeks market participants have shown 2 important things:

  1. No one can be trusted to 3,3.
  2. Backing is a meme, a token can trade beneath it, rendering it meaningless.

The market has shifted and we must evolve or die. Therefore with option 2 we propose a rebranding and merging with Tangible. This will include a migration to new tokenomics that Tangible is calling 3,3+.

The problems with 3,3

Let’s begin by examining some questions that have enthralled market participants for the last few weeks:

  1. Should OHM or any of its forks trade at a premium or multiple to NAV (Net Asset Value)
  2. What happens if Market Cap reaches RFV and new tokens for rewards can’t be minted anymore?
  3. What happens if a “backed’ token trades beneath the backing price?
  4. Does 3,3 even make sense?

Should OHM or any of its forks trade at a premium or multiple to NAV?

No one knows, at least I certainly don’t. There are arguments to be made for both sides, one side argues that these are just Money Market Funds, and that there shouldn’t be a multiple at all.

The other argues that the protocols are generating significant revenue separately from bonding, and should trade at multiples of revenue like anything else.

However this is crypto where what should happen is irrelevant and definitely not what will happen.

What happens if Market Cap reaches RFV and new tokens for rewards can’t be minted anymore?

This is the real question, if the market decides that these tokens should only trade at 1:1 of non native token treasury asset value. Then code line 577 kicks in and rebase rewards no longer exist.

Rewards can’t be minted if there aren’t sufficient reserves to support them, it’s literally programmed. This is truly an existential crisis for anyone using the model.

Rebase rewards not paying out will result in more sells and it becomes very difficult to restart the system again and to stimulate bonding. You could try to increase bond discounts which in turn will result in further price drops, a vicious cycle.

Eventually you won’t be able to restart the system no matter what you do. Then projects will need to decide whether to distribute the treasury to holders and throw in the towel.

What happens if a “backed’ token trades beneath the backing price?

Wonderland (pre Sifu drama) and others have recently traded beneath their non LP backing price. What to do in such an unfortunate situation? Daniele and co tried to stabilize the price by using treasury reserves to buy back. Then the price dipped below again, and they did it again. Will they just continue to do so until the treasury is empty? If yes, what is the point of raising the treasury in the first place? All questions remain unanswered, one thing is for sure, backed tokens are not what we were promised and backing potentially is just a meme.

Does 3,3 even make sense?

No, people will always default to protecting their own interest, in particular during downward price cycles. The most unbalanced thing about 3,3 is the fact it rewards mercenaries with the same rebase reward rate as long term holders, in our view it is broken at its core.

Option 2 specifics

Tangible will operate as a DAO, they will launch the TNGBL token that utilizes 3,3+ tokenomics. They will do this with or without Nidhi DAO.

However due to our prior arrangement if this vote is successful we have agreed the following with Tangible DAO:

  • They will 1:1 swap all GURU holders to TNGBL.
  • They will absorb our discord and twitter (Rebrand to Tangible DAO)
  • Initial TNGBL supply will be the same as GURU supply
  • Our core team will join Tangible DAO
  • The team will not claim pGURU and instead will receive a team allocation from the DAO tokens.

This makes sense for Tangible because they need a way to distribute the TNGBL token, we already have 2k holders that are interested in bringing real world assets on-chain and understand 3,3 tokenomics, this is the ideal launchpad.

You can read more about the TNGBL token here.

Please vote here.

Nidhi DAO is building a decentralized community-owned currency, backed by real world assets with the vision of creating wealth and abundance for all.

Recommended from Medium

Parallel Finance - Decentralized Finance protocol on Substrate

Why DeFi needs OneStake?

So I see metaverses are now a happening thing with Facebook changing their name to Meta and talking…

Bitcoin price analysis: BTC fails to break beyond $39,500 and continues to decline?

Saffron Weekly (10/13/21)

Are Central Banks Digital Currencies (CBDCs) The Future of Money?

WHY YOU SHOULD CONSIDER POLYGON IN YOUR WALLET

Stablecoins: What You Need to Know

Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store
Kubera

Kubera

More from Medium

$MUON Whitelist Update: get involved, get rewarded

Introducing the Tangible token ($TNGBL)

Axion Partners Up with Sekuritance’s RegTech Suite for its Launchpad

How to C-OP — Staking Liquidity