mUSD and other mASSETS integration should be a long term priority
Propose to consolidate existing EARN pools into only 3 types of pools
Curve pools facilitating bASSET <> mASSET exchanges;
Balancer pools facilitating mASSET <> mASSET exchanges;
Uniswap pools facilitating mASSET <> ETH exchanges (can hop to other tokens)
Community member @Leg proposed how the integration of mUSD and other mASSETS is a long term priority for mStable (more than MTA itself)
If MTA stakers can be fully subsidised by MTA rewards, all platform revenue can be funneled into the SAVE yield
Further expanding into what pools are actually useful in driving utility for mStable led to the proposal to consolidate into 3 pools
mStable limits exchanges when tokens are either drained to zero (eg DAI) or full (eg TUSD). Pools therefore have to facilitate transactions between bAssets, and of course bAssets <> mAsset.
bASSET to mASSET pool: For USD, it’d make sense to have a Curve pool with mUSD + USDC + USDT + TUSD + DAI, Curve is synergistic with mStable, not competitive. An added bonus is also that pool will have CRV + MTA rewards
mAsset to mAsset exchange pool, some kind of Uniswap + Balancer combination. Ideally, a Balancer pool with mUSD, mBTC, mGLD, etc + MTA would be easy to keep track, that’s two incentivised pools.
MTA liquidity pools: Overcollateralisation means nothing if there’s not enough liquidity to actually execute an MTA liquidation. MTA liquidated is selling MTA to buy an mAsset (hence why MTA was included in the balancer pool above).
Establish a strategy around liquidity pools that drive utility for mStable and increase TVL