Hello and thank you for the proposal!
I generally agree with the spirit of the proposal, but I find it lacking in ambition. If there are any reasons why the number of assets supported remains very modest, or if there are any selection criteria of which I am unaware, I would be grateful if you could share them with us in advance.
Based on what I know, I’d like to make a few suggestions and share my strategic point of view with you.
Indeed, Penumbra is an ecosystem with which it would be interesting to create bridges and strong relationships (an IBC bridge is a good start ^^) as soon as possible, for questions of positioning and common target (the zcash/monero ecosystem is also interesting for these reasons).
Let me explain: it seems reasonable to me to start from the assumption that these ecosystems attract a lot of users (old and new crypto investors) who want to preserve their privacy and use technologies and value units specifically designed for this purpose.
Furthermore, I think it’s important to create as many synergies as possible when it comes to privacy narratives and projects, also to avoid splitting liquidity and preventing censorship of the use of these value units (tokens).
In addition, and in order to maximise A/ the performance of phase 4 (liquidity bridge to Namada), and B/ the final appeal of the Namada chain from day 1 post phase 5 (start of the conquest beyond the people who have been droped $NAM at the TGE), I personally would have supported other major marketcaps connected to the IBC:
- MANTRA
- SEI
- DYDX
- AKASH
- CRONOS ?
- …
In this way we can attract more different users.
If that’s not possible, can you give us a transparent breakdown of the criteria you think are relevant when choosing which assets to support?
As for the argument that there will be less ‘competition for yield’ on these assets, I don’t really believe it (at least not for $TIA and lst $TIA) but it also seems to me that it’s not the only one that users will consider:
Shielded pools will reward the LP in $NAM if I’m not mistaken → if one is interested in $NAM that should interest them.
And then considering the advantages that Namada offers: SP and Namada in general should generate trust and create an asymmetric market advantage when compared to other ‘non privacy centered’ chains and protocols where yield is usually offered for IBC assets