Move ZKP liquidity to Curve and pair with FrxETH

1

Hi! Long time lurker, full time Panther zkp-porter.

Liquidity is lacking for ZKP! It makes it really not so great to trade on-chain, which is one of the biggest marketing draws for new users!

We need to increase Dev liquidity to improve the overall health of the network and bring in new participants.

I can suggest the following, shift all ZKP liquidity into a Curve ZKP/FrxETH pair or ZKP/FraxBP pair. Both of these pairings will earn permanent rewards from Frax and a gauge will bring new attention to ZKP.

Frax has a new incentive program that pays anyone who pairs to their assets.

If you didn’t know, Curve supports non-stable pairings with their V2 contracts. Its not just a stablecoin Dex!.

Improving onchain liquidity as we come into V1 will be key.

What I would like to start with this discussion is the following.

  1. How much funds the foundation should allocate to the Curve LP.
  2. Should there be liquidity incentives provided by the foundation?
  3. Which asset would the community rather be paired with? FrxETH or FraxBP?

Thanks
Sam

2 Likes
2

Hi Sam,

I like this creative strategy for adding liquidity to the ETH network.

From a protocol perspective, its beneficial as we receive Frax rewards as well as some new eyes from their community.

For me recently, with MEXC and V1 coming soon. I have a question about the chicken and the egg. What should come first regarding DEX, V1, MEXC.

Do we hope that V1 and MEXC (with a marketing budget) will help provide the price appreciation needed to make adding liquidity more cost effective?
Or do we add DEX liquidity first hoping that large sellers won’t drastically impact the liquidity, before we have any utility and demand, thus volume to absorb such.
I ideally wnt to see V1 and MEXC to launch closely together and shortly after more DEX liq on both ETH and Matic

If we go for DEX liquidity first and your Frax strategy, we may not to deplete the Matic Uniswap pool.

I guess the answer to my questions fall upon the 3 you asked already.

  1. Depends on how many funds we have to play with and comparing it with what is reasonably seen amongst other 6ish million MC projects

  2. I would like the foundation to incentivise community sourced LP but to work inside the MASP somehow. As the rewards emissions should function towards privacy mining. But this a personal idea of mine.

  3. Whichever asset has the largest amount of Volume.

1 Like
3

It seems to look interesting and fuctional at this stage of Panther, i vote for

1 Like
4

Can we add liquidity to FraxBP, leaving the pool in uniswap as it is, then how much liquidity will be required if we add zkp to the FraxBP pool? the latter looks more interesting from the point of view of acceptability and price increase.With access to Mexc, there is no need to pump uniswap with more liquidity, since we will have liquidity on mexc and a direct bridge for betting

5

Can we seriously look into this… Thanks Sam.

6

There’s not that much in the current LP. I don’t think it will be hard to move it. The bigger question is around what sort of liquidity incentives Panther will vote to provide.

1 Like