How about the assets that were not stolen, for example, $LINK on the bridge. For these who hold pegged-assets but can’t bridge back to eth due to brige shutting down, can they get 1:1 LINK redeemed? Harmony LINK bridge: $7.96 | ChainLink Token (LINK) Token Tracker | Etherscan
2 Likes
Wow. Someone bridged in 4500 LINK to Harmony 10 days ago…and it worked.
I sincerely hope they knew what they were doing and didn’t just join the ‘unaffected-but-affected’ club by mistake.
2 Likes
Wtf someone bridge LINK!? Damn I hope it’s the person with the huge LINK borrow position on aave! Even I enjoy that >1’000% APY but I just wanna get out of this jail and withdraw my money!
The bridge back will probably not open so fast… before the price has to be more accurate and for that is also liquidity missing. But if the bridge would now be open you could buy LINK with 63% discount bridge out swap to USDC bridge back to Harmony and do it again and again and again till LINK price is same then in other chains (cross chain arbitrage with juice APR)
1 Like
A few responses here and sorry for the delay. #familysunday & #footballsunday
- Yes, rONE holders have the choice to openly sell minted rONE on dex. They can sell, collateralize, place into liquidity pools, potentially swap for a liquid rONE token and use on R1 LaunchPad and other defi innovations. (Note: when bridged assets mint rONE, old bridged assets are burnt).
- To restart Defi after the bridge incident grants have been made to Harmony and I think any grant approved is a signal to the community of commitments and restoration efforts to the chain.
- The rONE token was built with deflationary characteristics through multiple vectors to offset emissions. (Constant burning of rONE and then a large ONE burn at year 3).
- The structure of the rONE token (and current on chain dynamics) we expect some supply and demand forces to influence depegged bridged assets until rONE mint date. To partake in the initial exit, you have to held affected bridge assets on 6/23/2022 and through rONE mint date. The initial mint date is capped per wallet to incentivize small community holders.
- Recovery One’s mission and purpose are the recovery of depegged assets (during the bridge incident). R1 is recovering depegged assets by means of backing them with ONE to build value, ecosystem utility and deflationary burning through time. Once depegged assets begin swapping for rONE we expect new (fully backed) assets will enter the Harmony ecosystem through future bridges. (Stably has talked about a secure fiat bridge).
Regarding LINK- It is pegged, but stuck because the bridge is down. Theoretically, it should bridge when the bridge opens. (Will get more info on this question and return).
Wishing everyone a happy Monday. I agree that the spirit of change (upgrades and recovery) are themes present in crypto.
In R1’s opinion, the Harmony recovery will be an excellent web3 story to tell.
So I have been a little away, but I am trying to read everything here. We can always compare different scenarios and let the numbers do the talking.
From my point of view, short term (and I expect a lot of users to see this short term) R1’s solution is better. Opportunity cost is on their side.
If I understood this right, rONE will be tradeable, so that will bring some great benefits down the line. I might be missing something, but we can always do a more … detailed … comparison if you guys want.
Matthew,
It seems like there’s a lot of things scattered around this thread about how all the mechanics will work, a lot of what you just mentioned is new to me, we had some community members confused and asked me for clarity. Is it possible to have a public Google doc that gets updated when things get changed with the full overall picture and process? Also, when is the expected vote and go-life for the proposal?
2 Likes
Ultimately, projections have to rely on a key assumption as to the price of ONE after the 3 year unlock. 66% of the compensation is based on that price.
If its higher than $0.0264, it can fairly be said to be 66% parity reimbursed in USD terms. If its lower, say 50% lower around $0.0132, it would only actually amount to 33% parity value in USD terms. All that matters is the price of ONE on unlock day, not the price average over the next 3 years which the other proposal would capture in addition to compound interest starting now since ONE is distributed monthly. If there is ever a rally between now and the 3 year unlock date, that would be major upside under the other plan. With a market price closer to $0.023 today, Stephen’s monthly distributions would already be up almost 15% in USD parity value so the users are missing out on all this upside to receive the lion share of their compensation in locked ONE.
You’d then need to factor in the return that can be earned on ONE distributed monthly starting now against this backdrop if Stephen’s plan is compared. If all goes according to plan, R1 would net more of a percentage of loss amounts. If all doesn’t go according to plan, it won’t. And there’s no way to know this for certain until you see the ONE price on unlock day and the price of rONE after you mint it and its available price in these liquidity pools. There can also be losses incurred after minting for some users as the price will fluctuate significantly due to the ability to mint and sell rONE until depegged assets increase by 200% from their current price.
This also considers the price of rONE maintaining itself in what appear to be tiny liquidity pools which will be significantly diluted in my opinion. Even bringing every single depegged asset up to 30% parity value to then sell the minted rONE from this in any liquidity pool would probably drop the price of rONE in half in these pools under the assumption that there’s millions to be made from this trade. This means new minters will mint for more rONE and this can easily result in a death spiral at least at first putting any early minters at risk of actually getting less than 30% of their parity value in USD terms when all is said and done. If they mint and stake and these arbitrage trades are made, they might actually only end up getting 20% of their parity value in rONE. Again, its entirely sensitive to price.
Its possible early rONE minters take 50%+ losses if the depegged assets are raised to the 30% level by this trade only to dump the rONE significantly impacting the price.
Any spreadsheet made will obviously assume prices of rONE and ONE and that’s the only factor that really would matter for a mathematical comparison. If ONE and rONE prices go up, or stay stagnate, it will be higher. If prices go down and ONE is lower on unlock, it will be lower than if you had it now and staked it while ONE was above $0.023. This is the only assumption that matters.
If you want to do a projection, I’d focus on how much of whatever liquidity gets put in is going to go to this arbitrage trade and how will that affect the rONE price? Without these pools, rONE will only be exitable through the redemption process at a 50% haircut for the first month or additional 67% hair cut for most people after the first month (unless they wait for the linear penalty model to increase) through redemption. So they can’t really get out without a huge haircut and this forfeits their locked ONE. So a person taking early redemption is only going to get close to 15% parity (50% redemption in the first month if they met the snapshot) value or even 10% parity value (33% redemption after the first month until it increases towards the 3 years). So in that scenario, how is it you are so certain it is better?
If 30% of the parity value only is redeemed for approximately 10% of the parity value under the early unlock through the 33% redemption window and the ONE price is something like $0.02 at unlock, it would not amount to a 50% reimbursement. It would be 10% parity value from the early redemption and the locked one is forfeited, right? So the only way it would be better is if the following assumptions hold 1) the rONE price is maintained so that when a user mints 30% parity value, they do not lose value by holding, and hold the entire 3 years and 2) ONE price is higher than $0.0264 when unlock happens. Of course if they mint and rONE price goes parabolic, they could be totally reimbursed from this alone by selling it or redeeming it. It just depends almost entirely on prices.
Since Stephen’s minted the same 2.5B tokens, these users would get 50% reimbursement at $0.02 monthly (already would have realized a pretty sizable advantage given the price of $0.023 today) and immediately can put that to work at 10% staking APR and higher APRs on dexes like Fuzz, Sonic, Defira, and others where ONE is already completely incentivized. If they compound this the entire time and ONE stays stagnate, I would bet they would come out ahead in 3 years.
Adding compound interest to this available buying power today almost certainly would get the parity value actually reimbursed to be higher than the R1 proposal in even a fairly rosy landscape of assumptions. This also needs to factor rONE staking compound interest as well - but also sensitive to rONE price.
Otherwise, the entire model relies on the price of rONE holding up in these liquidity pools which don’t sound like they are going to have much liquidity at all and anyone can dump into them at least until millions in depegged assets are brought up to the 30% parity level. Once that happens, I would assume the price of rONE would more or less stabilize and could increase with effective utility strategies. There will likely be significant volatility in rONE price until the arbitrage trade is washed out. We won’t know which way that’s going to ultimately go, hence the risk involved. rONE could 10x while ONE crabs for all we know and in that assumption, it would be far better. With risk comes the chance for both upside and downside. But if its downside, there’s easily a set of assumptions where the users get way less than 50% especially if they redeem at any point in the process as opposed to waiting the entire 3 years.
These theories read like a core team member told to throw the original plan back at the community.
You don’t think its warranted to consider that since 30% of the compensation is paid in rONE to factor in the massive hole here to this plan affecting the rONE price that can net non-affected wallets a profit at the expense of early rONE minters with no other option but to redeem? Why would Harmony use their treasury for that. Its irresponsible.
What are they supposed to do if they mint early before the liquidity is balanced out? Assuming the rONE minting contract will base each users token amount when minting on the rONE price in the liquidity pool. If a user who lost $1,000 mints rONE before the arbitrage and receives “$300” in rONE at $0.01 they would receive 30,000 rONE and it subsequently drops in this liquidity pool to $0.005 they only actually now have $150 in USD purchase power. And they can’t get out other than realizing this loss furthering the downward price spiral by swapping out of it or redeem (death spiral). Add rage quitters into this and it could get ugly. If they try to get out through redemption its another massive haircut. So they can stake for 15% (paid in rONE) and that will not even return them to the original “30% USD parity value” in the entire 3 years. $150 with 15% compound interest annually compounded daily is $235 in 3 years if rONE price maintains the $0.005 price.
If they lost $1,000 and mint rONE when the price is $0.005, this users gets 60,000 rONE and could end up way better off than minting before a price drop. It adds another element of potential losses/gains for certain people based on the rONE price so its a direct catalyst here and the most important factor in determining maximum compensation.
People are going to lose money based on when they mint due to this so its a serious consideration here. Its the only actual compensation anyone will receive up-front. Of course all the others like the partnerships, governance, will get millions upfront but the victims only get rONE with low liquidity subject to a 30% repeg trade and depending on when they mint around a price shock will depend on how much buying power they actually got.
Unless the amount of rONE tokens a given user would receive at time of minting will not be based on its liquidity pool price?
My only goal is the maximum compensation for those who woke up to losing everything.
Hi mlotis, we are releasing sections at a time. It’s best to answer questions as they come one by one. A lot of the questions and confusion. babakajone questions and confusion are examples.
First, Recovery one believes Harmony will grow and have a successful recovery from these current market conditions.
Here are answers to statements and what ifs
- Yes, we agree…. as you pointed out “If all goes according to plan, R1 would net more of a percentage of loss amounts.”
- Simply put, all rONE is minted at 66% parity of the asset taken from the bridge incident date, 6/23/2022.
- All holders of rONE choose how to use the token in the market and have a choice of when to redeem rONE to ONE. Redemption choices engage the deflationary burn mechanics depreciating the supply of the rONE token (as rONE is redeemed it is burned) and sets in action the burning of ONE token at year 3. The second deflationary aspect of rONE is the deflationary nature of the $100M in unpegged bridged assets. Holders of rONE can choose to wait and recover value with time, or holders can choose to redeem rONE to ONE before year 3.
- Yes, rONE and ONE will be correlated. There is potential for rONE to have greater utility with ecosystem use, defi use, and burn mechanics depreciating the supply. You mention, “rONE could 10x while ONE crabs for all we know and in that assumption, it would be far better.”
- Recovery One asks, what do bridged assets do in the ecosystem? First, they are ported from one blockchain, they can be used in Defi as collateral and other financial strategies, a bridged asset remains in an ecosystem longer, some are not directly correlated to ONE, some are/were pegged to USD as stable coins and others had a strong ONE correlation. The rONE token incentivizes long-term retention in the Harmony ecosystem.
- The treasury is used in the Initial Exit for individuals has to have held depegged assets and continue to hold depegged assets. The initial $1,000 per wallet redemption limit (at 50%) within 30 days of the mint date, has a snapshot date for depegged assets value and holds the date, 6/23/2022.
Babakajone,
Thank you for your questions. In your comments, you created multiple paragraphs and situations where Harmony does not grow and succeed, you created many situations for the Harmony ONE token to decline.
Recovery one believes Harmony will grow and have a successful recovery from these current market conditions. As you pointed out “If all goes according to plan, R1 would net more of a percentage of loss amounts.”
2 Likes
The Recovery One Governance Contracts have been reviewed by Tranquil/Defira. We thank 0xGoten and his Defi team for their assistance, support, and advice.
5 Likes
We created a new thread, with the proper classification as we move towards action in September.
Please visit the new (Recovery One Foundation) post in Governance. Please redirect all governance comments from this Community thread towards Governance.
Thank you.
3 Likes
Thats the problem. You believe in your gamble.
Stephens original proposal at 100% reimbursement is much better.
No assumptions, no “we believe”, less complicated.
And he was responsible for it. Core team was responsible for it.
In case something will go tits up, I’d rather have ability to directly blame core team, not some nonames.
And another thing - VOTING POWER about proposals SHOULD HAVE DEPEGGED STABLE HOLDERS, not plain ONE holders.
2 Likes
Recovery One is solving the bridge incident with positive solutions, creating ways for Defi partners like Tranquil, Aave, and others to back the depegged assets via rONE, and discussing how that would work on their protocols. The final proposal will be voted on by depegged asset holders and then ONE holders vote.
Please visit the new (Recovery One Foundation ) post in Governance. Please redirect all governance comments from this Community thread towards Governance.
VOTING SEASON is coming!
2 Likes
你好 我的1usdc 就放到钱包里面等的么？需要做些什么？
Hello I would like to ask how celer negotiated a solution with you, I am a celer cbridge lp provider, my assets were migrated to haromy, but celer completely ignored us, there are other millions of assets lp provider I did not find them, I do not know how they defend their rights, I saw you mentioned celer before, so I would like to ask what they have talked to you, what you have developed a relevant plan.
1 Like
from google translate- 鑄造 rONE 和對即將到來的提案進行投票的說明將很快發布
Please visit the new (Recovery One Foundation ) post in Governance. Please redirect all governance comments from this Community thread towards Governance.
VOTING SEASON is coming!
At this point, all contact between R1 and Celer has been done so through Mo Dong, who I believe is on their team. Please also note that there has not been any special proposal made for Celer at this time.
我的资金是2022年7月16日从celer上面提出的 1usdc。现在要怎么操作？