Bakers,
Please review the proposed tokenomics diagrams before we go public with this information, namely the airdrop for the Unilayer community. The anticipated release date for this information is Saturday, so speak now or forever hold your peace.
https://lucid.app/lucidspark/invitations/accept/inv_d7da67a6-1c83-457b-8281-7103b3d5d881
Warm Regards,
Chef Buns
Pretty nice thorough diagram. I have a few comments to start it off.
a) I wonder with 250K generated per day how effective or noticeable the burn function as pictured would actually be as opposed to not having one. Without a math estimate, itās hard to imagine this having any significant effect to counter the massive token generation.
b) This inflation rate makes it difficult to calculate the effects of being an early investor, or for someone wanting to invest money. I would love to see an option to invest in something where I could receive a portion, however small, of the new tokens being generated. For example, an investment pool with a split 1-2% of tokens generated going to early/strategic investors would be something I would pay a premium for, not so much for a stack of early tokens that may quickly become diluted otherwise because of the 180 day initial doubling in supply. Depending on how important early investment is, perhaps this could come out of the āteamā allotment, or from another allotment.
I do find interesting the allotment of airdrop tokens to a EasyBake, I would be curious to know what this means or how that will work
Overall, itās looking like a solid plan. Can anyone comment on how close this model is in terms of token generation to PCS or other farming platforms?
Iām not very well versed in tokenomics as im more of a NFT/Design guy but from what I can see it looks solid.
However I have two questions.
How will the platform incentivize/reward private/early investors in a highly inflactionary environment?
And secondly, are there any other plans to burn tokens other than the ones stated in the document?
In regards to the Unilayer community airdrop. There have been talks in the chat about Layer users having access to a private sale.
While I do not know what kind of arrangements the EasyBake team has with the Layer team I believe that an airdrop should suffice. And any pre/private sale allotments should be allocated to members who contributed to the survey, showed proactivity, tried to contribute with something, or even kept the telegram group alive, I.e early supporters of the project.
Hey Buns,in the first days of EasyBake you told us that there will be a synthetic LP token for the early members,it is still in place?In the survey I filled,it was a question about the funds locking period for early investorsā¦wonāt they get super dilluted if they canāt even farm?
I agree about the locking in terms of dilution. Essentially, this needs to be calculated when making a decision to invest I suppose. The inflation rate is known, which is good. I would imagine if it was a larger investment amount, the locking would be more important, but for smaller amounts, I really donāt know that it would be that significant or necessary.
I guess it would have to be only one tier, or the larger investors would feel like they were getting front run.
Ideally, early investors would be interested and want to farm tokens rather than sell so early on anyhow. I imagine if we tried, we could come up with a solution to encourage farming from early investors.
I know it would add extra layers of complexity trying to incorporate a scheme which somehow incentivized the early addresses that invested to farm by for example being rewarded for farming, and somehow disincentivized to dump.
Not sure if Iām qualified to even comment on this. I will say the diagram itself is easier to follow than many Iāve seen, so that is done well. The tokenomics of what it shows tho is where I donāt feel qualified.
I do agree with Yellow Cake and other comments on here from what I do understand. And as with them, my first impression was āthat sure seems like a LOT of daily minting.ā Iām not sure why it isnāt designed to mint āas needed.ā
Strong value for any asset always boils down to supply and demand. When there is a product, antique, Real Estate, stock share, token, collectable item ā¦,
Whatever the asset is, itās value is 100% fully determined by supply and demand. This is why I prefer to see supply added as demand increases.
My observation is that the crypto world has gone way overboard on the supply side. I realize that rewards are incentive to hold and provide liquidity. That is all great, but when not regulated, itās just like the central banks constantly printing money to spend, it drags the value down.
Iād encourage using a model which creates tokens based on activity, volume, need, etc., from the very process being rewarded rather than the idea of generating a giant pot to give away regardless of whether there is sufficient use-case to warrant the supply growth.
The best scenario creates just slightly less supply than there is demand, thus causing a continued desire (demand) for a strong asset. Rewards are great, but increases in value creates far more interest. Sure, some look at an asset for the rewards, but most are looking at growth to determine their participation.
A balance of the two is better than either/or. If itās all value growth, you get a pump and dump. If itās all rewards, itās difficult to get the ultimate consumers, so no matter how huge the rewards are, earning 300% APY is nothing if the asset is dropping value at a greater rate. There are MANY tokens out there proving this.
I am in one right now and doesnt feel good at all!
LOL Sorry, I donāt mean to laugh at your misfortune. But yeah, I think most of us have been at one time or another if not currently.
I suposse what the community can do as a whole is trying to gauge what other projects have done right and wrong and try to come up with some sort of compromise in such a way that everyone is happy.
I share some of the concerns of chef yellow cake and others. The early supporters will see their locked up investment diluted.
Ideas: 1.reduce the lockup time for distribution
2.allow locked tokens to be staked in a reward pool.
3.create limited nft given to early investors containing traits of value. Examples: can use it to farm oven in a dedicated pool(directly offsets dilution). Future nft airdrops.
What are some other ideas fam?
Also, for the reason of taking care of the early easybakers here, I preferred the previous version of the airdrop diagram where a larger portion went to easybake than unilayer. Now I see itās changed to 50/50 and airdrop reduced from 25% to 20% as the 5% was moved to the token sale.
I have different thoughts on the sale.
75-80% of the premine is a lot to work with. But considering the inflation is going to come on hard and strong, Iād like us to remember to value the committed bakers who want to bootstrap the project by providing early liquidity.
I think perhaps an angel round would be most effective to provide us with adequate terms for supporting Easybake through the early growing pains.
Could easily reduce sizes of seed, private and public round to create angel as well.
Currently the trend is to have much smaller public sales and create lots of demand. I think 15%. Is too high. Especially considering the airdrops. That means 35-40% circulating at TGE. Thatās a turnoff for private sale investors. Iād say 5-10% max public sale.
Our large private sale allotment can be subdivided into 2 or 3 rounds to target specific audiences.
I like our plan in general, itās a good start. But letās fine tune it in the next couple of days. Glad to be doing this as a community and have everyone share ideas!
Yeah, Iām pretty sure that is exactly Ms. Bunsā intention with this forum.
I like the sound of much of your suggestions, tho mostly beyond my experience to comment on. The first part, however, I think is a mindset I see too often.
If weāre so concerned with locking early supportersā tokens, itās assuming the inflation issue. Again, I think the crypto world keeps looking at it backwards. As I mentioned earlier, if the supply and demand is controlled correctly, we shouldnāt have to worry about being stuck with a bag of devaluing tokens.
If we just want the early supportersā tokens distributed soon enough for them to dump with the rest of the crowd, thereās a serious problem with business model.
As an investor, I prefer earlier access to tokens, not so I can dump them, but so I can start off with a healthy amount to participate in the ecosystem. Farming oven and staking to get sugar-as these will be governance tokens to accumulate. (Also for nft participation.?)
There will be airdrop recipients, public and private sale buyers who will likely have large amounts of tokens to begin with.
In many investments that would be perfectly normal,(they usually lack block emissions),but a dex with farming and staking yields is a different story. The most significant yields are achieved early on.
Many of our early investors may want to have a say in governing easybake in the future and it would be helpful to not hold back the tools needed to participate.
Looks good to me! Well thought through, bravo
I agree with that. It sucks as an early investor to get diluted because the tokens are locked. 
I donāt know if there could be a mechanism where the locked tokens go automatically to staking or something like that?
In response to your mention of attracting or deterring people by token price alone, we need to remember that what is being built is a platform with a lot of use case, the tokens are important, but in some different ways. The large supply is needed to incentivize liquidity, which is an essential part to the platform functionality.
I agree with your comment on a type of growth curve for release that isnāt necessarily linear, I can only imagine how complicated this would be to do over a ātimesā block type of release.
Having said all that, if inflations stays the same, I would want access to more of my tokens early as an investor for sure. More so than the options provided in the survey.
Nice write up Kosher.
Thanks for the clear diagram. Easy to follow and great work!
I like the dialogue here and there are several valid concerns expressed by people here.
Some people are concerned about the numer of daily tokens produced but this isnāt very different from the usual bsc farm.
The example that I like a lot on bsc is apeswap (check apeswap.finance). Their docs are here: Welcome to ApeSwap! - ApeSwap.Finance They have a similar number of tokens everyday as easybake is planning.
They started without presale and just did a banana frenzy which was 40 banana/block. After a few days it decreased to 10 banana/block. This is a great incentive for early people.
Could be an idea;
One of the big problems for farms is to survive the inflation. Everyday new farms are started on BSC. Just check this list of 265 farms in the last month. Public Rug Doctor Farm Diagnosis List - Google Sheets
Only a handful of them have survived.
Farms fail because they canāt cope with the inflation and when there is too little liquidity. Once farming starts and it pumps people often sell off and token collapses. Iāve seen farms that allow presales or allow to provide liquidity before actual farming starts. When that happens there is often a collapse once farming goes live and people start to sell off. Itās a tricky dynamic. If you donāt have enough core liquidity it creates a problem. I believe this problem become much bigger in the design proposed here.
Not only is there a seed and private sale there is also an airdrop. If there is no lock this is just asking to dump tokens.
If seed is 0.05$ & private is 0.15$ there is a lot of incentive to dump the tokens. Seed can do an easy x3 and private maybe a x2.
I havenāt seen any farm with a presale that actually survived and is doing well on bsc. Iāve mainly seen dumps from presale and airdrops. Why would it be different here?
I think the risk here is huge. Especially for the airdrops.
Why donāt we take the example of the very successful farms on BSC?
Like apeswap, bakeryswap, pancake. Why invent new tokenomics and create extra complexity when you are the first on polkadot?
One thing that I donāt understand is that 10% tokens going is to the team.
The team already gets all the transaction fees from swapping, no? Why is that 10% allocation necessary?
So in short. The inflation is similar to other farms but the seed, private sale, and airdrop are a lot to deal with and prevent a farm collapse. I would compare tokenomics of succesful farms from bsc and not tamper too much with that. If easybake is the first on polkadot you have the advantage of being the first mover.
Cheers,
Yellow Cake, [Apr 30, 2021 at 6:34:16 PM]:
So, bakers.
For unvesting, shold take a lesson from Cardstarter, and do a daily unvesting rather than monthly, or quarterly.
Less volatility
And smoother overall
So, to be clear, I am suggesting having the vesting period for the alloted time, but have the tokens released daily rather than in larger time frames like months or quarters to help minimize shock and volatility, which can damage a good project.
I agree with yellowcake as i have projects that have dumped because of large monthly amounts of tokens being granted . In the example i seen a project unvested 40% of the supply and the token price crashed over 50% . This doesnt look good to new investors when the look at the token chart and price action
I appreciate you vocalizing your concerns and this is precisely why there will be a lock on the tokens for seed and private investors.
This is to ensure a smooth distribution that allows for more time for the ecosystem to mature. Those interested in farming their heavily-discounted tokens in order to beat out inflation are more than welcome to do so.
Those who sell will have a minimal impact on liquidity assuming we are able to identify the optimal unlocking rates for investors. This is the result of a complex analysis consisting of variables including (but not limited to): the emissions (inflation) rate, embedded incentives, and the private sale unlock schedule.