Address clearly inequitable staking yields

I am writing to address the recent changes in the staking proportions within our ecosystem. After careful consideration, I believe these adjustments have led to an imbalance, particularly affecting the MAYC NFT holders. I am of the view that this revision warrants a re-examination for the following reasons:

  1. Disproportionate Impact on MAYC Holders: The new staking structure appears to have disproportionately affected the returns for MAYC NFT holders. Given the significant value of these NFTs, currently estimated around $13,000, it seems counterintuitive that their staking yields in $APE are now lower than those in the $APE-only pool. This disparity raises concerns about equitable treatment of different asset holders within our community.
  2. Questioning the Existence of the $APE-Only Pool: The current structure, which includes the $APE-only staking pool, demands a re-evaluation. The fundamental purpose of staking pools, in my understanding, is to incentivize and reward long-term holding and contribution to the ecosystem. However, the $APE-only pool, in its present form, seems to challenge this principle by offering higher returns without the same level of investment or commitment as that required by NFT holders.

I propose the following for consideration:

Reassessment of Staking Yields: Conduct a thorough review of the staking yields, particularly focusing on the balance between the $APE-only pool and the NFT staking pools. The goal should be to ensure fairness and incentivize holding of higher-value assets like MAYC NFTs.
Community Discussion and Feedback: I encourage an open forum for community members to express their views and provide feedback on this matter. This would ensure that any adjustments made reflect the consensus and interests of the broader community.

In conclusion, while I understand the complexities involved in managing staking structures, I strongly believe that addressing these concerns will contribute to a more balanced and equitable ecosystem. I look forward to a constructive dialogue and am eager to hear thoughts and suggestions from fellow community members. I know that these staking allocations were determined through a previous AIP and are based on underlying NFT price, but the resulting yield setup is clearly inequitable and broken.

  1. The value of the NFTs doesn’t really matter. MAYC is not the “main” collection. I think the distribution is based on relative importance.
  2. This actually goes contrary to what’s being heavily discussed in the ApeCoin discord. The ApeCoin DAO is not a yuga NFT dao. The DAO was not created to serve NFT holders only. If you look at a lot of the AIPs and the contributors of the DAO, a lot of them don’t even hold the NFTs but they do hold ApeCoin. So questioning the existence of an $APE-only pool is kind of a slap in the face of those who are active contributors in the DAO and own a lot of apecoin.

Also let’s be frank here for a second. A lot of yuga NFT holders are clearly using APE for yield. It’s just collect the yield, and market sell on repeat. The actual risk takers are those who are holding APE. Looking a the ApeCoin chart its clear what a massive risk it is holding, and the yield from it does not compensate for the loss in value. The APE emission for your NFT was a bonus gift. I wouldn’t be surprised if in the future NFT APE emissions are further reduced. Those claiming and selling ape won’t be able to vote on it anyway so I suspect it will pass quite easily because at the end of the day only those holding APE will have power.

I encourage you to checkout the ApeCoin discord. There are lots of very active members who hold no NFTs. There’s a large part of the DAO that strongly believes we should slowly move away from being so closely attached to the NFTs and be our own separate entity.

2 Likes

I agree with being frank - I do not really care if there are people that hold $APE without any NFTs in a discord together, I think separating $APE from the NFTs they were created for and largely are associated with is one of the most shortsighted things the DAO has been doing. I think the $APE only pool is the pool that is draining the value of ape and dumping it and for people who aren’t even making a financial commitment for any period of time. The yield for any category of staking does not compensate for the loss of value in apecoin, because it is basically a scamcoin that has lost 90% of its value and is trying to play itself off as the future of gaming while still giving people who do nothing but hold ape and stake 100% APY for absolutely no commitment (no substantial time or money commitment to earn these rewards). And I am aware of that large part of the DAO that thinks that “Apecoin” (who literally shares a logo with BAYC) should move away from NFTs entirely - I disagree with them staunchly and think that it is a stupid idea. The only reason anyone even knows what $APE is is because of BAYC and NFTs and I wouldn’t be surprised if the coin dwindles down to 0 once the DAO moves to separate from the only thing people know it for and instead reward most the people who have committed the absolute least in terms of time or money

2 Likes

I do not really care if there are people that hold $APE without any NFTs in a discord together,

This is the main discord where a lot of the official contributors are active. Other than this forum, that’s the other common “hangout”. It’s not some niche discord with a bunch of apecoin holders.

I think separating $APE from the NFTs they were created for and largely are associated with is one of the most shortsighted things the DAO has been doing.

The founding docs make no mention about NFTs being the primary driver of the DAO. If this was the case, voting would be NFT based like the MocaDAO. But it’s not.

I think the $APE only pool is the pool that is draining the value of ape and dumping it and for people who aren’t even making a financial commitment for any period of time.

To get ApeCoin you can either stake the NFTs and get it for free, or buy the coin with money. People who own only ApeCoin actually got it by buying it, not for free as you seem to suggest. How is that not financial commitment? If someone has > 100K apecoin, and no NFTs, which there are plenty, how do they not have a significantly larger financial commitment than you? By your logic shouldn’t they have the largest say since they have the most financial commitment? On top of that they have lost a lot of value if they held it from the highs.

because it is basically a scamcoin that has lost 90% of its value and is trying to play itself off as the future of gaming

Interesting that you think this but at the same time you demand more of this scamcoin.

At the end of the day the DAO was created around ApeCoin, not the NFTs.

1 Like

I think we need the actual APYs from apestake, BendDAO and Parallel listed here for accurate comparison.