Reply to Qs Launch Pool and Listing

Dear Meritians,

Today we got listed on Binance and additionally got listed as a Binance Launch pool project. Aside from a lot of warm reactions to this positive news, there were also some valid Q’s and concerns raised. Caring about all voices in our community, we want to take the time to address these and paint some context that will hopefully give a more complete picture. We know some of you are worried about the 1,25% supply increase over the next 60 days. We understand the concerns, but we believe this should not affect the DAO and $MC negatively. Rather, we think it will be a net positive. We care a great deal about the token economics and supply dynamics and all our decisions will always aspire to reflect this. Let us try to explain the bigger picture and address some of the concerns. This is a deal that has been struck a while ago as part of our initial launch plan (it just took a bit longer than anticipated). A balancer sale + a launch pool was the distribution method we believed would have the most positive impact.

Launch pool is a tool that gives the $MC DAO wide visibility and enables wide distribution. A Launch pool has 2M unique participants on average. It also enables us to roll out onto the BSC ecosystem more easily. This will further increase demand and utility options for $MC, including non-native staking options. Many people that are priced out of ETH or are not on Dexes to begin with, now have access to $MC. Binance is the exchange with the most users and highest spot volumes. We’ve also made sure there would be an $MC pool, 20% of the rewards are distributed back to $MC stakers, the APR on this should be very high and also attract more buyers.

Over time, we would like to see the DAO on all the important chains (if the community decides to). Say what you will about Binance and BSC (the opinions vary widely), but they are still the most important player (hub) in the space atm and we think they will be a valuable long-term partner. Some of the DAOs gaming partners are also building on BSC.

The DAO did not just give tokens to the Binance community, we will get a lot in return for the DAO and $MC tokenholders. It’s not easy to become a Launchpool project, Binance has a very extensive due diligence process. After their DD Binance also wanted to be an investor in Merit and a long-term partner to the project. To avoid frontrunning, we could not disclose this until the listing and launch pool were announced. We will cooperate with Binance on more things in the future. Their extended network and their expertise will benefit the $MC community. Some of these benefits will become more apparent over time. Stay tuned with the announcements on both sides. We believe we have much more to gain than to lose from this partnership. It will be a win-win.

As this was part of the initial deployment and bootstrapping plan, approved by the early Merit Circle stakeholders. As these decisions took place in a period prior to $MC token launch, it did not follow the same governance procedure we are used to now. Normally, these kinds of decisions would obviously be subject to the current governance sysem. All current and future decisions are subject to $MC governance

There is nothing to worry about. Other comparable launch pool projects have, on average, not been dumpfests. Most of those did not have a native pool, nor did most of them have the fundamentals and strong community our project has😉. The only thing to worry about is self-induced FUD, not organic sell-pressure from the pool. The latter should be overshadowed by new interest and added utilities.

If this happened right after the BLBP I don’t think anyone would have cared, and we believe it still really makes no difference in the grand scheme of things. This really is a good thing, one of many milestones we will hit.

We can’t control the price. The token will be volatile. Up and down. We can only work, as a DAO, to make the decisions that generate the most amount go long-term value to the DAO. This is what we’ll keep doing, delivering at a breakneck pace.

Meanwhile, we do welcome all feedback, your voices are always listened to❤️

4 Likes

Personally, as a MC holder that got knowledge of the token via Binance, would be pleased if further token usage options could be done at this CEX (only the biggest worldwide) as staking. Either we like it or not, Centralized organizations (as Binance is) one cannot dismiss the huge “crypto showcase” that this CEX is and seizing the moment after the launch is key to increase adoption of MC who has by itself all perdicates as a robust project. Staking is in my opinion a key aspect to involve medium/long-term investors on any given asset. As long there’s a return worth to keep a token, long-term investors will be more than happy to hold an asset as MC which directly translates in funds applied and not easily and quick liquidated.
Take a look at Axies for instance which is part of MC game portfolio; at Binance it is possible to stake with generous APY’s which option supply is often sold out at 90; 60 and 30 days thus making AXS a “premium” HODL token at this CEX. As long it is kept, less the price volatility is due to occur granting it strength and visibility.
Staking is available at MC native dApp and with a very generous APY, nonetheless many investors have their assets stored in CEX’s and being possible to stake at those, they find useful in return of a good APY, not having an idle token thus not making a quick sell which translates directly in less price decrease.
It is my opinion that MC core devs should take this moment advantage of having the token recently available at Binance and renew a staking option on this CEX after what I think it was a great launch success grabbing a few new thousands of MC holders. I state again, as long as the token is holden with a interest rate, less volatility (mainly downwards) is due to occur.

I recently moved back my tokens to metamask and staked via dApp and agree from a user and fees perspective it would be simpler to have the option to stake at Binance.

More importantly, the only reason I stake is defensive, to try to minimize dilution, which is not a great feeling: “if you don’t lock yourself, we will dilute the s* out of your holding” ok.

As we all know APY in the form of native tokens does not generate wealth, just a constant pressure on token price.

To attract new holders, a good long term token price chart is more important than headline APY, which mathematically works against price (unless the operations generate enough income to buy back more than the constant issue, like at Apple, which today is not the case here).

I would much prefer the dilution to be substantially reduced, and switch to different rewards for staking, e.g. directly apply distributable profits to those with +1 year of locked staking ahead for the benefit of loyalty, let the rest compound for the benefit of assets, both actions good for price.