Even though a WLEO-ETH.RUNE would be a nice addition, I think it would be much better to keep focusing on the ETH-WLEO side first rather than spread (and partially dilute) our 'liquidity power'.
I think that currently Leofinance has a lot of things in the pipeline and with our current situation in Uniswap we have the 'liquidity problem' more than solved in the short term (we don't have a lot of volume anyway).
I would like to see a 'faster' launch + optimization of the new ____ project + all the token/miners airdrops rather than diluting dev work into 'more liquidity pools'.
Even more, I would say that I would prefer to create a WLEO version in Binance chain and then try to get us listed on BepSwap rather than try to link us with $RUNE in the eth side (only because we already have one). Did you think about that possibility? (honestly I don't even know if it's even possible, just a quick idea that crossed my mind).
5. In short, are you in?
'Not now, maybe in a few months'
If there's not a better use-case for devs time then yes, if this would delay the other developments then no.
Hope you understand my point, have a good Friday :)
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
I completely understand your perspective on this.
Where I am coming from, is the Liquidity problem (being easily accessible quantities of LEO available for potential investors) has been solved - yes, however all those funds ($1 million worth) isn't really generating any fee income. There has been three trades on the WLEO/ETH pool in the last three days, totaling around $2000. A second pool, with a different pair, would open arbitrage opportunities that would increase the frequency and regularity of trading on the pools, and thus fee income for the LP'ers.
The main dev time would be working out the Geyser issues and so on for this. Actually setting up the pool is something Khal could do in 10 minutes. Even I could do it, without asking anyone for input if I liked. The hardest part would be paying the gas fee to actually set it up - it isn't cheap.
Developing and building a wrapped leo token on Binance chain would be alot more work I think, and Bepswap will be retired in a few months once Multi-chain roles out. I have thought quite a bit about suggesting a WLEO on Binance chain, but I think it would be spreading us too thin. It's definitely possible, but worth the time and effort? Plus Khal's dev team and @fbslo would have to learn how to wrap to a different chain, and that is more potential risk of something like the initial WLEO hack re-occurring. I have a lot more confidence that this version of WLEO is secure, personally.
I really appreciate your points of view, and am happy all sides of the discussion are being aired.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
Thanks fr the detailed explanation, If that's the case then I'm fine with a WLEO-ETH.RUNE pool, I would participate with something around 5K$ worth of funds into the pool to help to get the liquidity loop going (Maybe I would add more, but don't want to commit with more than 5K$ at that point). $RUNE isn't my favourite coin but as long as I researched it's a good hold with very good potential. The marketing push could be very well worth and we won't have the same window of opportunity later.
Count with me and thx for caring about LEO.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta