Welcome to epicenter the show which talks about the Technologies project and people driving decentralisation and the blockchain revolution. I'm Federica ants and I'm here with Zubin co-teacher. And today, we're speaking with Zeus. Who is the founder of Olympus? Dow a limb. Mizdow is an interesting project. It is a protocol managed treasury that some have called a Ponzi and we will get into that
in just a bit. But before we speak with Zeus about Olympus now and let us tell you about our sponsors this week. Kali is a new wallet for web 3rd, five at sees the wallet as a public good. Think of it, like a community-owned. Alternative to mask. It has Features of meta Mass. But the difference is that tally is 100% open source under the GPL V3 license and it's 100% user owned with all profits flowing to the community. Not a corporation.
The launch of Talley is coming in the new year, but the team have just released an early version to the community, the tally Community Edition. Before the Dow launches, what features are in your ideal wallet, what annoys you about your current wallet, try tally and join the community on Discord. Their Community calls feature a new partner. Each week and have about 500, uniques joining. All the info you need to know. Is that tally. Cash?
And our other sponsors cow swap. So dex's are great, but they're vulnerable to problems like ma Mev, Fair transactions and high gas costs. How swap Packers these issues head-on and offers a new kind of trading experience built by gnosis cow. Swap is a meta decks aggregator. That's right. It's a decks aggregator aggregator. It fights Mev by matching overlapping orders directly. If no coincidences of want is found. That's where the cow comes from.
Trades, are settled on a variety of underlying on chain a M&M's. Pending on which pool, offers the best price and there are news on cows. Web protocol, is also they, recently this week. I'm crossed the five billion and trading volume and VIP 13. So notice Improvement, protocol 13 move to phase two and it's a proposal to spin out the kelp protocol team and launched its own token. You can vote on that now, Perfect.
Quit Zeus. Thank you so much for joining us. Yeah, it's great to be here. Thank you for having me. It's a pleasure. And so obviously, you're a nun. So basically we usually ask people what they did before and how they got into crypto. So maybe you can give us like the slightly lost over version
of this. Hmm. Yeah. Spent a couple years in traditional markets and then got into crypto in like early, 2018, spend some time trading eventually, you know, I think, especially during the, the 2018 to 2020 like zero-sum, bear
market trading environment. Decided that that was not really the best use of my time but defies summer occurred and, you know, there's This proliferation of new ideas and you know, like this first real utility for smart contracts and especially on a theorem or pretty much solely on a theorem.
At that point. I found that fascinating to that stood out to me, was, you know, kind of earlier in the like actual summer was ampleforth and the other being like the bases ESD DSD whole wave of seigniorage. Like stable coins, you know, II was especially drawn to algo stable coins. You know, I kind of came in as a Bitcoin guy. I see, you know, the one of the biggest utilities of this new like blockchain technology, as, you know, creation of new user owned and decentralized
currencies and monies. And so that was, you know, where I kind of kept most of my attention, you know. I kind of witness the the the rise and fall of all of those different experiments. It got me thinking especially with ampleforth and like the rebasing where, you know, it's a pretty new phenomenon in, you know, Finance in general is just the ability to, you know, unilaterally, adjust supply, of
an asset. And yeah, I mean, at that point started thinking about the, the base concept that It ended up being Olympus tried to pull kind of the things that worked didn't work from all these various experiments. And then yeah kind of, you know created this Persona in December met Z prime or Memphis cantus. Who rip he was supposed to be here, um unfortunate. But yeah, I mean kind of got into the swing of things. We launched Olympus back in.
Ouch, and yeah, it's been a pretty crazy year and I'm sure we'll get into that. Cool. Um, how would you describe? Ohm in a nutshell? And what made you excited to build this? Or how did you come up with the idea originally? Yeah, so, um, aspires to be a reserve currency and the the key word there is currency, right? So first of all, not a hedge fund, I'm trying to be a hedge fund.
A lot of people have been claiming that we are and I disagree and I don't think that like an amount of money makes you had fun, just by default. Anyways, you know, so what I see is that we currently have several different forms of money in crypto, you know, so the most well-known ones are probably Bitcoin in a Mmm, but we don't have any actual currencies. There is a difference between the two.
So the things that are held up as you know, great for money's like Bitcoin and etherium, you know, the fact that they are hard and that they're, you know, immutable and monetary policy to at least a high degree and that they, you know, are in some part designed to appreciate and definitely, you know, those make for great monies. They don't make for good currencies. And what we've seen is because of that much. Or that lack, there has been this hyper dollarization of the industry.
So stable coins are you know, the the fastest-growing asset or yeah, like class of assets and crypto by a large degree, you know, they make up spots like three and four on the top 10. Now, you know, there's like more than 150 billion in market cap. It points to a massive Market need for an actual currency in the industry. And if we don't build one, that is defy native or Krypto - it will just Be tokenizing, the
tried fi equivalence. So, you know, that's the goal of own is to be that you know, internet native currency rather than a money. So how does own this set out to become a better form of currency than the US dollar? Yeah, so there's a couple components one, you know, so there's this rebase mechanism in the for the we'll talk about this more. But you know what?
One of the purposes that that's meant to achieve is that you don't want your currency to be changing rapidly in value over time or, you know, pretty much at all. Like, you know, the ideal currency is going to maintain the same purchasing power indefinitely, you know, maybe some amount of inflation. It is good and that it pushes people to use their money and not just hoard it.
But, you know, you can just think it's like ideally flat, you know, if you have, that's difficult to to, to balance with incentives, right? Where there's this, this need to incentivize people to build up a new monetary Network, you know, you're going to be taking on risk. That it doesn't work. You do. You also have other opportunities that you can go, and, you know, take your money to pursue. And so there needs to be some incentive to bootstrap the
network. If you don't want that incentive to be price growth, then you need something to defer that price growth on to something else. So, you know, there's a three base mechanism that essentially gross supplies. So that the price can stay relatively stable where you know, the price of own has been + - I mean, it's more like somewhat volatile but + - you know, 50% Send two hundred percent the same price since we launched. I think currently like as of today. It's 50% below.
Like the initial price of the network has grown, but the price itself can remain within a consistent band.
Where, you know, the the goal intent is that over time volatility constricts, but you know, you always have a reasonable expectation of what 1 ohm is worth, you know, and that allows you to price Goods. And efficiently, you know, like I would want to like the biggest issue with a currency that is, you know, one volatile or two, you know, consistently trending in a single direction is that you're constantly forcing people in the economy to update the price of their goods, right?
So if you're a company and you're trying to sell some item and you determine based on the input costs and how much profit you're trying to take that, it should go for this amount of money. And you spend a bunch of money on marketing to Advertise that product to people saying cost of
this amount of money. If that prior if the value of that money is constantly changing, then you have to like throw that out the window, you know, every couple months and update all of your materials saying, oh, it's actually now this price and you know, you it produces instability within the economy because people never have an anchor to lean on. How does this compare to other mechanisms that aim to keep stable value, but not necessarily dollar value.
So an example of that would be right. What do you think? Owen does better or differently than those? Yeah. So I mean the difference is just that they're, you know, while we are in this very early stage of home. There's a speculative component to it. You know, there is upside in the growth of the network and you can take part in it, you know like Rye is Actually took the their route of let's be that currency from day one.
And the issue that they've run into is that there's no incentive to grow that Network or really use it. Where, you know, it's like the end state is yes. You have a non USD currency that like, has its own monetary or independent activity, but, you know, there's been a very difficult, I think, like acquisition.
Of user experience for them where like, you know money or a currency is a network effect at the end of the day, you know, it's just a medium for people to interact with each other and I would see him the, the, you know, that ultimate Behavior as needing the network effect behind it. Already for it to really work otherwise, like, yeah, I mean, it just makes it a lot harder than, you know, we are in an
industry. That is primarily driven by speculation and you can either fight that or you can harness it, you know, that's kind of the difference that would say Is the so it seems like you mentioned there's like a speculative component or we're in a speck of the phase 4. Ohm. Is that something that you see going away? And how do you like get to non-speculative face? Yes, I see it diminishing.
So a lot of this is modeled on bitcoin where it's not trying to replace Bitcoin. I think that there's no need to do so, but rather to take what worked for Bitcoin and apply it to something that is not trying to do which is money versus currency. And what we've seen with Bitcoin is that you know, as it gets larger, you do have just natural reduction of volatility you do just have these things start to
take form. I don't think that they will ever Like reach a point of 4X level or like low volatility, but you know essentially like I would see it. As with growth, you hit points where you know, just the expectation of returns diminishes, you know, like what people are shooting for with a ten million dollar asset or 100 million. Dollar asset is very different
from a trillion dollar asset. I don't think anyone's looking for the next hundred X on bitcoin, you know, and with that like, you know, just as you scale the the expectations diminish and you know, it becomes more palatable because you you've introduced different people that are there for different reasons than, you know, they might be very early on. You know, it's also at that point less of a speculative Endeavor, you know, conceivably
many of the issues and open questions and you know, all of these risks are of his items that, you know, create the asymmetric opportunities, you know, have been answered and have been satisfied already. So almost fractionally backed by a basket of assets and this basket of assets. So basically, as far as I could see, it's mostly USD, stable coins and pretty volatile assets like ether, right? So, basically, how does this comport with what you're saying
about a stable asset? That's not correlated to the dollar. That's not that doesn't, that's just not just pegged to the dollar.
Yes, I you know one I would not consider their being a direct correlation between the value of almond, the value of the treasury, you know, there's an indirect correlation between the two but you know, like if eith is 100% of the treasury and he goes down 1%, that does not mean that ohm is going to go down 1%, excluding the the liquidity portion of it, which I'll touch on a sec. But you know, essentially, the goal there is that we are accumulating.
What is currently Vivid money or our currency, you know, like, those are whatever. What is recognized today, you know, there's no reason to fight that, you know, essentially, the purpose of the treasury is that the the protocol has purchasing power, you know, to influence the market if it needs to and to do that, you need to have a treasury that consists of assets that will continue to be recognized as valuable.
You know, like today I would consider those as You know, primarily USD and then like ether / B TC and it's a lot easier for us to have Ethan Bitcoin, you know, Bitcoin on a theorem is trusted in any form to some degree.
So, you know, it's primarily there's also liquidity in there, you know, so that liquidity is paired against also, you know, like die or E3 but they are different Assets in that, you know, the liquidity is paired against um, you know, it has varied Direct like utility for the market in that the protocol is facilitating trading at all times. And then, you know, one other piece that, you know, I think
it's super interesting. And I don't think gets recognized that often is that because the protocol is the one, providing all the liquidity, you know, any time that someone is making a trade, the protocol is the counterparty on that trip.
So there's this question of like, you know, when is the treasury going to be deployed into the market, you know, especially like lately because we've, you know been down in the dumps a little bit and it's like Okay, the treasury is actively buying back every time someone sells, you know, a we keep, you know, generally more than half of the treasury and liquidity.
Where you know, it's actively deploying significant amount of money to allow people exit, if they want to, you know, those reserves which is money that is kept off to the side, you know, for the purpose of like, you know, you don't want to have everything exposed to the market at any given time. But you know, that is actively a dynamic, you know, pretty much 24/7. Got it.
So, you have this protocol owned liquidity, which is the protocol basically buying and selling and it seems like that's related to bonding. There's like bonding and staking, right? That are the two main things that one can do in the protocol. Can you talk us through how that creates this more stable currency that you ain't from with with So first just kind of explain them. So bonds are a automated and I see it as a removed moral hazard from the equation of the protocol liquidating its own
token and exchange for assets. So it's looking to accumulate assets, you know, there's a route that you can take of just meant a bunch of tokens into a multisig and sell them into the market. Market, that is wrought with moral hazard. Um, you know, there are so many things that can, you know, either go wrong there or be, you know, used for malicious actions in, you know, either a direct
way. You're just like stealing money or an indirect way of your front-running trades and, you know, you're doing things like that. So, the bonds, you know, have, it's essentially a mechanism where it spins up an isolated market for an asset. It prices that asset based on third-party Behavior.
It doesn't use a Oracle. And, you know, one thing that is unique to the way that we Implement them is that they defer trades over a set amount of time, you know, so you go and you Bond and you know, maybe your vesting term is a week and you will not receive those tokens until a week from that, you know, the protocol pays a little discount or a low premium on the assets for that because you as the buyer are going to look for some level of Count to accept that illiquidity, you
know, otherwise you can just go to the market and buy there and you know, you have the tokens right then. One of the things that the the bonds accomplish is that they, you know, provide liquidity to the market where, you know, right now it's one directional flows. So it's providing sell-side liquidity.
That's kind of a mean, like VC say it, but I do think that it's quite valuable in that, you know, one of the issues that you will run into especially with early-stage projects is just that there's not enough liquidity for, you know, people to enter and so they won't. You know, if it's not where you can only buy 10K, Earth without moving the price by 10% and so, you know, if that's not enough of a position for you to really care about it, then you're just going to go somewhere else.
So I will add, you know, I think that especially probably in the near future that will move to a net system where you're doing to way. Flows protocol is actively buying and selling and it just becomes what is the net of that? So it has its old more, this day has, it bought more this day and that gets determined by how people are behaving in the market. So if the market moves down, And it'll buy more. If the market moves up, it'll
sell more. And then if the market goes flat, you know, you have some net. That's kind of like, to the staking, is this component where you have tokens and you can stake them with the protocol to earn more tokens and, you know, especially historically. This has been had quite High rates. The reason for that is that the protocol was accumulating assets at quite High rates relative to to market cap and to you know, the treasury that already had. The dynamic that this has.
So when you offer bonds, they are inherently deflator delusionary onto the market, right? So you're creating new Supply and you are adding it into the market and you know, everyone else is ownership of the network is going to decrease as a result of that. The the analogy that I would use here with house taking plays into this and I see this is one of the chief, like benefits of it is You know, imagine like a bucket or a pool or something of water and you drop some dye into it.
And if that water is still, you're going to see the dye in the water, you know, it depends on how much you put in there. But if you imagine, it's like a decent amount. Then the water is going to change colors with the staking does is it makes that water moving?
So, you know, now imagine the same thing, but with the stream and you dump well, are, you know, dye into the stream and you'll see it for a second, but then it To Peyton a moves because the water is constantly moving and it's getting shifted around to everything and it gets swept down. We're like, I think it's pretty crazy.
So we have grown supplies since launched by 87% and the treasury's worth 600 million dollars, you know, our our market cap has been below that for what like 60% of that time, you know, so without even selling half of the supply, you know, It was able to accumulate a significant amount where, you know, essentially that's taking component protects everyone from
that dilution. It spreads that impact of the bonds out, you know, it defers it over time so that it is not, you know, it would be economically unfeasible. I think to do this. If you did not have that steak and component there, the good thing though is, you know, because we started with, you know, very very high rates and you know, the result of that is one you're going to have a lot more volatility because flies growing really quickly.
You know to the bond discounts get really deep because you know, there's additional implied volatility. There's also yet. I kind of keep up with what staking is going to provide and so the protocol has to spend more for every, you know, asset that it takes in.
But you know, we started out very high because the treasury started with like a quarter million dollars and, you know, the growth that you're targeting is incredibly high in a percentage basis from that, you know, at this point Point with a 600 million-dollar treasury, you know, like the the growth that we target remains high, but it's not that hot, you know, it's significantly lower than it once was.
And so there's taking rates can come down and with those taking rates coming down, you know, you see decreased volatility as a result of Supply expansion, you know the rate at which everything is growing around, you know, the liquidity and around the treasury is Sharing. And so the treasury doesn't even have to sell as much because, you know, essentially the goal with the treasury is that you want to keep up with the rate of inflation in the network, you know, you don't have to add ever
or at any single given time. So there are times when you're, you know, growing slower than the network time for me wrong faster than the network. But, you know, on a net basis, you want to match it if supplies growing slower, you don't need to do. So as quickly. Yeah. It just makes everything a little easier. You can start to smooth things out. You can Start to like we're pushing out the bond terms. Now.
We're you know, we had five day terms for pretty much the first nine months and now there's like a there's 14-day minimums. There's like a 30 day out there. Now. I think we're going to start pushing for like a 60 in the 90-day start doing quarterly. He's a lot of cool stuff opens up when like you don't have 10,000 percent eighty wise, you know, it's actively like a - it served its purpose but Glad we're done with them. This is em. Can you maybe talk about bonding and staking?
In terms of when they under which conditions they make you money, and under which conditions, they lose you money. Yeah, so I'm going to talk in terms of how the bonds working now. They shifted a little bit. We have this like me to mechanism but I don't think that
it's that useful to let go into. So, I mean, it actually makes a lot easier with like this genome token, that we now have, which you can think of it like a bag of, um, you know, so it encapsulates, all of the re bases that are experienced in the market. So, you know, a uses this index which started at one when we started. And then every time those rebates, the index increases by the rebates Mount. So, you know, if you're a Staker, the price of own itself is not particularly important.
If you look at the price of gym, that's essentially like the the the analog to like a normal token, which some people don't like this and I understand why. But you know, I do think that at this point like, you know having that direct relationship available to see easily is a positive. But, you know, essentially the Seeker what you're looking for is that, you know, your Holdings increase at the same rate or, you know, probably ideally for you a greater rate than the
price of own depreciates. And you know, there's this D correlated dynamic between the thus taking growth and the price of own. So, you know, the staking index is constantly increasing. Price own kind of traits on its own. So, you know, over a long span
of time. It's expected to depreciate but you know, as period where it appreciates it as periods, where depreciates and you know, like you can expect in the long-term that it will decrease in price, but you know, the path that it gets to get there is anyone's question for a bonder. I mean, essentially what you're looking for is a similar Dynamic, but in herb adding a Time component, To it.
So the way that the bonds work now, which is a little different from how it used to is that you are offered a discount. The discount gives you an amount of genome, which is staked and you now, hold staked exposure, but you're a liquid until some amount of time into the future. So, you know, the dynamic here and, you know, what? We generally see is that you are a home or your ass taker already. You see some discount? That is appealing to you. You witch, you know, pretty much any time.
It's above zero percent. You're going to outperform if you just staked either. There's some amount of extra discount that you're going to want because now you have to be a liquid and you weren't before but you know, let's say it's 2% where you're like, yeah, that's that's it. You would, you know, under steak go acquire, use your own to acquire whatever asset the treasury wants. Give that to the treasury. The treasury will give you this
note that says hey in two weeks. I'm going to give you this amount of genome. Is 2% above what you had before and you've now increased their Holdings by 2%. So it the way that it primarily is utilized is essentially like a mechanism to increase your Holdings in the network. So you are assisting the treasury in acquiring assets. You're doing the actual execution work for it.
Right? So this is this like removable moral hazard is that you don't have anyone doing execution of Trades, you know, it's decentralized. Raised in. It's like carry out but you're also taking on illiquidity, for the network, and in exchange for that, you get to increase your Holdings in it. So, you know, it's this like accumulation mechanism or method. So in effect, you give the Dow alone, right? So I know which says how come stances would that be a loss making operation for you?
Yeah, so I mean, I would say Ohm terms, you're never going to take a loss. The loss scenario would be lets say you hadn't gotten the bond. And you know, it doesn't even need to be price goes down because you can think an opportunity cost terms. I think that's more fitting, but price goes to some level. Where if you were liquid, if you had those tokens in your wallet, you would have sold.
But instead because you're a liquid you cannot do that and you have an opportunity cost of not being able to do that. So that's your loss scenario. Oh, there is that you were not able to take that action until, you know, however, many days or weeks in the future that you can now receive your tokens back and
do whatever you want with them. So if you say you can't take a loss in terms of ohm, basically, if the value of ohm decreased you would take a hit right or you would in USD terms or he's terms or whatever. But in terms of home, you know, your steak to swim. You bought a bond with a positive discount. You have more room than you would have had. Otherwise, unless you were doing like a swing trade where you sold them Bob, but I mean, I don't consider that a little separate.
It does prevent you from doing that because you're like, but if the the scenario is your state or you bonded at a positive discount, I can guarantee that you have more home at that point than you would have otherwise. Oh, yeah, that means you have more own but that all might be, that might be worth less. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. No, so totally like, you know, at the end of the day it comes down to USD. You, I guess for I mean we want to displace this Dynamic, right?
But it generally does come down to what is the dollar price of my Holdings? And yeah, if the price of them goes down greater than the staking rewards provide, you more ohm and greater than the discount on your bond, bumped up your steak Holdings, then. Yeah, you would take it on the walls. One question around this. So it seems like the dynamic first acres is that you? And just tell me if this is like a long, the right track.
You lose money on depreciation of ohm, but since you're getting paid in rebasing, every time a woman has bought your you would expect to be net positive. Is that how it works? In terms of like staking? Yeah, so I mean, essentially your value equation is price times Supply. So, you know, for most assets, your valuation is just going to be price. You know, that's the only independent variable that influences anything and you know, you're holding is are going to be static.
Maybe you're staking for, you know, five six percent yield or something. But you know, you can consider that someone negligible. So, you know, really all you care about is the price of the asset. Whereas in this case, it's a two variable equation, right? So, it's the The price of the asset times, how much Supply I
have. And, you know, you combine that into what the actual value is. What, what leads you to believe that in the long run, the money that stickers make from rebasing, will be higher than the amount they lose on depreciation of home price. Yeah, so there's this argument that has been made which is that ohm should trade for the value of the treasury, which I think aligns pretty well.
There is, you know, this idea that oh, you like, you know, it's just going to depreciate back down to the treasury and you know, whatever value you have is just going to be whatever the whatever you're like RV or like, if you have 1% of the network, 1% of the treasury is going to be your Valentine. I I think that that take is very flawed, you know, the easiest way to debunk it is that it's like the equivalent of just saying that any asset should go
to zero over time, you know, because that's essentially what it is, like II view. The treasury as offsetting 0 up, right? So you have, you know, in a normal Network that has no assets behind it. 0 is 0. And then that or in a market that has 100 million. Dollars in assets behind it. 100 million is zero, you know, that's the point on which you can Ascent like 0 is your floor
for the market. And if you have an entity or you know, the protocol which can set the floor at a higher price with infinite assets relative to to supply to, you know, maintain that floor like you literally cannot lose this game, you know, what has more money that I can buy back every single token in Supply and have money left over then you just off. That your zero up. So, you know, is there a guarantee that staking rewards increase faster than the token
depreciates? No, same as you know, is there a guarantee that Bitcoin will go up in price? No, is there a, you know, it is there any guarantee that, you know, USD will depreciate slower than the federal funds rate like probably not. Or even faster than your curve yield. No, you know, everything carries risk, you know, that especially anything that has upside, right?
So if there's upside, there's always going to be downtown, you know, I think that our success comes down to a lot of factors and like, like really the staking yield is a abstraction, right? So it's kind of irrelevant, you know, it serves a purpose which is that we can have a relatively
herb we can have consistent. On the asset while still having growth in, you know, that people as part of the network and take part in, but it's kind of irrelevant like, you know, this is why I kind of like genome even though a lot of people don't is that it does like shatter that illusion and I think that's why people don't like it but like, you know, it's got happened sometime and you know like that.
That's essentially what the, the staking abstracts away, you know, and it has purposes that are not really like Make you think that you know, I don't view the the purpose of this taking rewards as make you think that you know, the price will stay completely flat guaranteed and you will earn 1000 % AP w. So talking of of yield. So Olympus doubt advertised for the longest time and I think still does apis of a thousand to ten thousand percent. Can you explain those?
Yeah, so the equation to compute apy in any scenario is the the amount of yield in some period times the number of periods in a year. So we do re basis every eight hours in a year. There are 1095-a Tower epochs. If the yield is like Point 16 percent, then you end up with a thousand percent apy, you know, historically. It's been higher. I think early on it was like, point six or something. But you know, like that is
computed correctly. I also, you know who it would pretty strongly argue that it, was true, you know, so what we're looking at, we're still two months out, but the, you know, initial apy Force taking was around, 100 thousand percent and we will probably end the year at 130 index, which is actually 13,000, but I would consider that pretty damn close, you know, and in the coming year, so we're lowering two thousand percent roughly which I think will be done in like a
week or two. The expectation is that that is maintained for around a year, you know, essentially we have this framework that every time supply has increased by 1000%. The the rate is cut by I think it's 25 or 30% per Deepak, you know, so Essentially like, you know, with 1000% apy that will be 1000% apy for the entire year and you know that framework is also like very public and widely known where, you know, you can forecast it pretty easily into the future.
Even if like, you know, like the rate is accurate. But whether that persists for one year from when you start is a question, but you can compute what it will actually be just based on that framework. Yeah, so so so, so if you zoom out of it, where does the value come from? So where's the value actually created? Yeah, so it is a mix of intrinsic value, which is the treasury and extrinsic value, which is a monetary premium.
So if you look at Bitcoin or eith, you know, there's some level of value there and like, you know, I think eith is probably the stronger one that you can make this argument on. But you know that comes from fees that are generated. But, you know, a very large degree of, it is just monetary premium. Same goes for gold or there's industrial uses for gold, you know, you can turn it into jewelry. That's not what makes gold 5 or 10 trillion dollar asset. What makes the five or ten
trillion our asset. I can't remember which one it is, but is monetary premium. It's that we as human beings figured out a long time ago that it's inefficient to use as money, something that is worth that actual amount, you know, because then you're just wasting a bunch of value in the economy.
And so instead we place a monetary premium on If we increase the value greater than what it actually is, so that we can trade with something that you know, it's really just based on social consensus and utilize value for actually valuable activities rather than just to sit in a vault or your pocket or under your bed waiting, for you to go spend it and then someone else does the same thing with it. So what, what I take from this is that basically you can create
arbitrary profit. It's as long as people don't cash out. Right. So basically those are book profits. So basically, if I wanted to, I could start the stable coin and say doubles its value. Every other value every other day. And on paper, the holders of this table coin would soon be very rich indeed. But if they end up looking to redeem, that's a totally another story, right? So, basically, can you walk us through how Olympus would deal with a significant amount?
And of stickers and Bundys redeeming. Yeah, so I mean like I'll first say that this is the case with any asset. So it doesn't even have to appreciate if anyone hold the error. If everyone holding some asset looks to cash that acid out. The value of it is going to go down, you know, unless you have some entity or group of buyers that are going to buy every single token off of them. You know, it's just how the
market works, right? Supply and demand pushes the market to a price of the single point in time based on supply, and demand at that time. And if Supply or demand changes in the price will change what the protocol does do is, you know, one it facilitates trading and offers the market itself. So you have this guarantee that there will be liquidity in the
market. And so, you know, on a normal day when you're not in, like if you're not in a bank run situation, then the protocol is completely capable pretty much all the time of allowing you to get out. If you want to get out, you know, which like Bank Run.
Scenarios are really a lot. Loss of confidence and so, you know essentially like I'll talk about that but barring that loss of confidence there's no issue there, you know, you can have the same Dynamic with third-party LPS, but you have a trust relationship that those LPS are getting continue to provide that liquidity. Otherwise, you can have that
Dynamic deteriorate. So it's like suddenly there hasn't even been a loss or loss of confidence with holders, but no one can leave, you know, there's just no liquidity for you to sell into. Indeed the bank run scenario. So, you know, you still have the protocol providing liquidity.
And so, you know, it's actually buying back throughout this process, but the you know, the price starts to tank because more and more people are selling and you know that leads to more and more people selling and you know, you can kind of spiral again. This is the dynamic that you can see it, literally anything. But, you know, we're not immune to that we have yet to do this and I will Kind of go into why.
But you know, the idea is that in these scenarios, the protocol Taps into reiterates reserves and says, okay, we're going to step in and provide that by side liquidity. So you can leave. And because this is a confidence crisis at the end of the day. It's just that people are scared that if they don't leave. Now, they're not going to be able to and so everyone wants to leave at the same time the treasury stepping in quelles that confidence issue, right?
Suddenly. Everyone is satisfied because so if I want to sell Protocols got my back treasury's, got my back. It's gonna let me do so at a reasonable price. And so I don't need to sell and suddenly no one wants to sell. You know, like this is how currencies work.
Like, you know, if everyone decides tomorrow that they need to get out of USD or Euros or you know, anything those, you know, even the strongest currency in the world will collapse, you know, it is guaranteed, like, you know, it's just a matter of like generally that's not an issue. I know when it is an issue, they can step in with their foreign reserves and, you know, satisfy the, the masses that are so
scared. This is what like FDIC insurance does as well for commercial Banks which you know instead of being worried about a bank run that everyone is going to pull money out of your your specific bank. And there's going to be no money left because you know, the bank is doing factoring reserve and its lending out your money to someone else and it doesn't have it on hand. FDIC Insurance in the US will Print dollars and give it to the bank. So that that concern does not
exist. There is never a scenario in which there's not enough dollars to pay you back. And so you never see a bank run, because why would you have a bank run? There's no concern to be happy in terms of why we haven't done this yet. I see it as just a matter of scale. Right? So essentially the bank run situation is a game of chicken. You, you have the the market which is looking to exit and you have the, the treasury Which is looking to prevent them from being concerned.
So I guess the market is concerned and you know, they're action that they will take is that they're all going to dump and the the treasury wants to to calm those concerns and you have a game of chicken. Who's going to Blink first is the market going to Blink is the treasury going to blank the dynamic that you need to have. There is, you know, who's going to win this game of chicken, right?
So if the treasury steps in and it starts buying but you know it Have to spend too much of its reserves to do so and suddenly the treasury shrinking to, you know, that's going to compound the issue of it's gonna make it worse because you know, suddenly whereas previously you had the treasury can step in and you know, people are going to be comment by that alone where you know, the bank run won't be as bad because that still exists.
Once you start tapping in in in size, you are you are going to get hit with the situation of like oh shit. Now the treasury is smaller to and so there's people that were fine before. No longer. So this is the dynamic that you need is. If you think of this game of chicken has like two cars and they're driving at each other, and it's a matter of who's going
to turn first. You need the treasury to be an 18-wheeler, you know, it's got to be a much larger car than the car driving at it. So that, that car driving and it knows that it has no chance of winning this fight, you know, it can overpower you with ease. It's not going to tap in even a significant portion of its Treasury and it's going to calm
everyone down. Going to be just fine and that removes the need for this scenario to ever even happen, you know, because you know that it's just going to win like, you know, there's this common saying like don't fight the fed, you know, it's because if you fight the FED like, you know, maybe there's some tail risk scenario where the FED actually does lose but you know one you got bigger problems that happens and to it, you know, pretty unlikely and that's like the last event that
you're going to have is when that when that occurs. So you just don't do it, you know, you don't like it's going to win. Well, why why fight a fight that you're going to lose? But just, I mean, the reserves way smaller than the outstanding loans, right? So basically, how do you create that confidence? If it's not borne out, by fact the treasury is smaller that, basically, everyone who held home where to cash out. There's Way that this could be, could be borne out by the
treasury, right? Yes. So, it really just comes out. I mean, so I would ask the same with like, literally any asset where that is the case. The difference is just that you have a guaranteed buyer in the market. And, you know, a comes down to a nominal game where like, you know, historically we have been on a reserve base has backed 5 to 10% and on a total Treasury. You back to like twenty to forty percent.
So, you know, in that scenario where it's like 40% right now, you know, so it's a billion-dollar actually right now. Damn. It's like six hundred sixty percent, you know, it's a billion dollar market and you have, you know, like 500 million in actual Assets in the treasury, you know, there's a reasonable case that like you could deploy those assets and either like accomplish that goal.
But did the issue is still that that's not that much money in the grand scheme of things, you know, so there are plenty of just single whales in this industry that have multiples more money than that, you know, like so the nominal kind of hurts you and that, you know, the nominal needs to be to the degree that like, there's just no point here, you know, so if if you maintain that same level of backing in this grows into a trillion dollar asset, then suddenly you have a treasury
with Billion dollars in Assets in there with the sole purpose of just cashing people out if they want to get out. Like that's probably enough liquidity for everyone. You know, Bitcoin doesn't have 400 billion dollars worth of Assets in there waiting to deploy in and you know, it's drawn down but not like, you know, there's no Bank Run
concern really. At this point in time, you know in this point in its life that everyone is going to dump like this is the Ponzi argument that people made at it for literally A decade is you know, if everyone decides to sell it Going to go to zero in there, right? But like, you know, money's and currencies are a consensus mechanism, you know, they come down to just social consensus, that this thing has more value, even though inherently.
It does not or in our case. It does not to that degree, you know, her. Like I think it just comes down to, you know, time where you need to go through a bunch of really tough scenarios and you need to, you know, rise really quickly and Drop really quickly and you know kind of lash people from side to side and really show them like okay here is every scenario that can happen and it's still alive. You know, that alone just has that Dynamic of like, you know
mitigating that concern. I would like to add something here. So I think this is I see where you're coming from but for instance die, I mean this is over collateralized. So basically this does not hold right and basically also for the US dollar system. Yeah, I mean, obviously I mean we've had fractional Reserve banking for a long time and it's not covered in gold or anything. But I mean, if you look at the assets that back the debt that is that is held in u.s. Dollars.
You know, all the houses and businesses and so on. That is actually, I mean, the value of that is actually weigh in excess of of the u.s. Dollar value as well. Right? So it's so in a way, this is also over collateralized. So I would view them as essentially, traditional currencies our debt-based currencies, right? So there, you know, for the most part produced by collateralized debt against something else, you know, is plenty under collateralized run,
collateralized debt out there. But you know, like or you're talking about with you know, you draw, you know, you take out a mortgage against a house or, you know, something like that. You're right in that. I mean there's an argument to be had like, you know, there's dad is going to inflate the price of Housing and you know, like the Value that house is not as great as the loan that you took out, but, you know, barring, that
that's correct. Like, you know, ohm is essentially Equity based currency. So, you know, and instead of a debt relationship, you have an equity relationship, you know, which is more akin to like how money Works, which is pure equity, in a sense. You know, I would also, just argue, in the case of like died, you know, there's a month, tricky relationship.
Like this is something that I kind of learned with the whole algo stable weight, which, you know, if this is a confidence thing, you know, and that's really what it comes down to is just like, you know, how people on a aggregate level of viewing.
This a peg is a very dangerous thing because you're essentially telling the market to derive all of its Confidence from being this one price and if it is ever not that price you you risk a roading confidence like on an aggregate level and when that happens you compound the issue because you Youyou deep egg slightly and then people start to get out because you've deep egg slightly and suddenly the peg more and more people are going to leave. And you know, you can spot like
this. How all the I was tables essentially failed is that you have a very small D pegging incident that turns into a full-on collapse. We don't have a peg, you know, so it it removed like, you know, this is why you need to be over Claudel as disabled coin, you know, are what I have one more point there, but like, you know, to a large degree, is that you need to have Absolute control over meaning maintaining that bag at all times. Otherwise, you risk, total collapse, and it can happen in
an instant. But essentially what the debt does, right? And that collateralization is that guarantees demand for the asset, right? So you don't need to have someone come in and buy die for die to come back up to Peg, you know, because you're just going to liquidate debt and that's going to serve as your demand. And you can guarantee that that's the same thing essentially that the treasury does.
Which is that the treasury Guarantees that there will be demand in the future for the asset, you know, so it's a similar purpose, but, you know, like, I personally think that like, debt based systems turned pretty Insidious, you know, relatively quickly and, like, you know, I think Equity base currency is, you know, at a bare minimum like pretty unexplored in, you know, like modern the modern, currency landscape. I'm of the belief that it can work.
But, you know, I guess that that's part of the Experiment. One question I have around. This is empirically, you talked about. Being down in the dumps a little bit how have like speakers and Vonda is done. And what do you think is driving that market cycle? So, you know, I think that one of the main issues. So there's two components that I think really like because, you know, you can look in, like, it's draw down a lot.
But if you zoom out more than like, three months, it's, you know, remains flat or up. You know, I think that there is two things. So one was the entrance of a new type of Market participant in Mass, which was a lot of people that were looking at. The apy is guaranteed money and were We're aggressively deploying in and, you know, discovered that it can draw down. And, you know, suddenly like, you know, the time Horizon was very short, you know, they're looking to come in, get rich
quick and then leave. And you know, you can look at pretty much any any Market in the world, you know, if your Market becomes dominated by those type of participants who just going to go up really high, and then you're gonna go down really far just, you know, how it works because, you know, the it's a reflexive relationship. I mean, I personally like the Really spent past August of last year, like disconnecting from social media and was not particularly active in the
community. You know, I do regret that now because I spent, you know, the first 6 Plus months of our existence like really urging people against that, you know, trying to explain that the the yield is not free. Money. It serves a purpose. And, you know, we're communicating like, you know, essentially what it is, but, you know, you know, that's not how you should view it. It's That you are guaranteed this amount of money, you know, II stopped doing that for for a
period of time. And I regret that, you know, I know that there are other people that did that but the other voices on the other side of the aisle kind of one out. I think for a period of time, the other issue that we ran into and I think that this was the much more significant one was dead, right? So, you know, kind of going along the lines of this is free money. People started to lever up aggressively, you know, they
call it 99 you. No, so you take you, you take your own, you go to a lending Market, you borrow against it, you use that to buy more home, you know, hopefully you don't do this again where you'll ever against it again, but I think that they were probably people out there doing that where the market built up like a quarter billion dollars worth of debt in the span of like two and a half months, you know, aggressive
growth of debt. And you know compounded by the fact that because this is on a secondary Market where you need real. People lending money for people to borrow so you can compare this to like die, which is a primary Market where Dy is minted for you to borrow and so you can control those interest rates and keep them low.
The interest rates on these debt was very high, you know, people are paying 22 percent, 25 percent interest, which we could when you put that on a quarter billion dollars a debt. That's a lot of interest payments. And that's interest that has to be paid in died. In USD. See And, you know, external asset and because people are Levering up, you know, they're putting money into the market today and there's not a whole lot of guarantee that that money's going to be there
tomorrow. And so we've had this massive debt unwinding, we're like two hundred million dollars worth of debt has been repaid in the past two and a half months, enormous sums of money, you know, I'm of the opinion that literally no other Market probably like in the industry barring, like maybe major caps would have been able. To whether that kind of storm.
Like, you know, if you think about the amount of liquidity that is required to not only pay back, 200 million dollars in debt, but payback everyone else that's trying to leave as that deck gets on wound like it, you know, it's insane, you know, and it's really just facilitated by the fact that, you know, any other situation like this where you have third-party Opie's, they would have pulled their liquidity a long time ago and suddenly you have a market that has 250 million dollars in debt
and two million dollars in liquidity and You know, if you go to zero, all of the lenders are shit out of luck like, you know, and that's the end. You know, I think that like this was a great demonstration of the fact that like, yes, you know, we've drawn down and it's been painful, you know, we've essentially Unwound all of that debt, we were able to do.
So while paying back every single lender, you know, so I think that proves that this is great Market Blended, you know, like, you know, keep those interest rates low because you know, it's a pretty safe place. Apparently, if You know, not only can It Grow very quickly and you're just gonna have people that take profits based on that growth, but it can also pay back all of this debt in a very short period of time. I mean, those are the two main pieces.
We also had this migration where we moved to New, a new contract set. And there's just a lot of communication like challenges going along with that. There was the introduction of GM token, which was like, a whole other thing of people, not understanding how that works.
And You know, shattered, the illusion a little bit which you know, I am of the belief that like, really the people that draw the most, like that dislike that the most are those that were kind of coming in with that short-term mentality because it shatters the illusion that this is guaranteed, you know, like thousand percent apy, you know, it says look like this is DeeDee abstraction of what that actually means. Which, you know, if you had an understanding of the system, you
know, it's nothing new. Like okay. This makes sense. Like, there we go. I was already Computing this on paper anyways, so like now you've made it easier for me to learn more like see it. But, you know, that was a whole other component where, you know, there's a lot of like social turmoil with that and communication issues. And then like, you know, it's just a distraction that Suddenly It's like what are we even
doing? Because we've just spent so long like talking about the stupid migration that like, you know, we've kind of lost the the forest for the trees. Yeah. I mean, I think that like those are the key things that kind of came together all at once. Yeah, so it sounds like the narrative kind of changed or got lost when you were not involved. How do you fix that? Or how do you think about rectifying that?
Because it seems like this free money narrative still is like pretty pervasive and in some parts of the community.
Yeah, I mean so I'm of the belief and I'm like I was guilty of this myself is that, you know, we had super strong consensus, you know, from like February or February when this was announced to probably August or September of what this was and what we were trying to do. And I think that there was a level of complacency in that understanding that, you know, people would continue to understand that, you know what that ignores is that, you know, or the community grew very
quickly and You have a lot of people that are coming in and trying to learn about it. And unless you keep that data, you know, messaging and understanding very clear and, you know, it gets passed down the chain, you know, it's like a game of telephone, where, you know, you tell one person, they tell another person, you know, you need to make sure that the message stays the same, every piece of the chain, you know, so there's a level of complacency that that would continue to
occur. And, you know, with that, you make less effort to make sure that every piece of the chain, it goes, you know, like, you know, the message stays the same. Name and you end up in a scenario where the, like, you know, five people down the the line. It's a completely different thing than the first guy. Said, you know, you've kind of failed the game of telephone. Yeah, I, you know, I think that that's been a wake-up call at least to me personally.
And I think to a lot of the other people that, like, you know, we have a lot of great like Community leaders and like spokes. Yeah. Spokespeople are, you know, whatever that are constantly trying to educate on these things, you know, I Think it's been a really good wake-up call. I was like, hey, you know, this is a consistent thing. This is not like a one and done, you do it and then you're finished like, you know, it's a war of attrition, you know, he's got to keep at it every single
day. You know, I think like with that too, you know, there was this like now there's this narrative which you know like that. This is a hedge fund and you know, that is not been helped by like, you know Wonderland which has now come out and said this is what we're trying to do. And so that confuses people to in that, you know prior, you know, We're pretty much just like following in our footsteps. And you know. Now they've switched it and you
know that confuses people. Is this still the same thing so no like but yeah, I mean II see right now like actively like that level of consensus and cohesion is like very rapidly returning. Like I'm quite happy about it.
You know, I'm getting back out there personally, which I hope helps but you know, I don't think that like I'm the only person at this at all, you know, it's definitely a joint effort by a lot of different people that are, you know, they have the understanding, they know what.
Like I'm of the belief that we are actively targeting what we always have been, you know, it's just a matter of communicating that again and you know, doing so in a very clear and open manner because you know, maybe we forgot that, you know, you got to be doing that day in Day Out. How do you do that? So imagine that I'm like new in the community really excited think that this could be something really big, and I think that it's just like free apy risk-free profit, short term.
I can make a lot of money and get rich. What would you say to that? How do you fix the narrative? Okay, let's treat this as like someone's listening. And they want to know, because that's probably what this is. I try to never talk about the yield except for what it's for, right? So, like I personally, and I've said this like many times like pretty much since we launched like, I think that it's the least exciting thing here, you know, II felt that way from the start.
But you know, there is a level like okay, you know, this is going to catch eyes and that's a good thing because, you know, one of the Hardest things to do in this industry is just capture attention, you know, there's so much going on every single day that, you know, you know, you need some way to draw eyes, but you know, I've always tried to stress like, you know, it's for a purpose and the purpose is not to viewed in that light, you
know, some definitely 11 talking to someone and, you know, going through or either explaining or just discussing like, you know, don't talk about that in terms of like oh, in one year, it's going to be worth. This much, you know, is obviously a much more complicated equation than that, and, you know, really like it just serves a purpose. Like I view a personally as like, the the targeted rate of growth of the network of anything. So it's not how much it will grow its targeting.
You know, how much it actually does is, you know, determined by many factors probably Chief among them being execution, which is, you know, always the risk in pretty much everything is execution. Yeah, please, you know, when when talking to people don't fixate on that as the the end-all-be-all or purpose of this, you know, it's very much not the case, you know, it is a means to an end in a tool. Nothing more. So, this is that's a lot to unpack here. So maybe I kind of, I'll try to
kind of break it down. What I'm taking from is in two parts. So, the second part is that Olympus Dow has a treasury and it manages its own treasury, kind of a lot like other protocols like yarn, and then basically there's a year on that Treasury. And I mean, that's kind of, that's kind of the the part. That we've seen time and time again. In this ecosystem. The first part is kind of how Olympus now actually comes to hold that money.
And I do view that in the very least, at least as unorthodox. And I mean, this is kind of, this is kind of where the punsie aspect of it comes in. And basically, what people Think is a Ponzi. Basically, the fact that I mean basically if you look up the definition of Ponzi, it's it's a form of fraud that pays profits to earlier. Investors are people who cash out earlier with funds from more recent investors and I feel like Destiny.
Does not really the way to deny that that is happening here, right? First off, just on a on a semantic level. I just like that term, you know, I think that most people in defying and crypto understand what people are getting at when they use the term.
But in a more traditional sense, it is, you know, the importance of that is not so much early investors, pay new investors because you can you know, that that's where the everything is a Ponzi argument which I you know, I don't think it's a great argument. But you know, that's where that comes from is that you can point to very very many things. World and say look exact same Dynamic.
The what a what classifies a Ponzi is generally that you are lying about what you're doing and you know, like bit connect where they said that they had a proprietary algorithm to minor trade Bitcoin and we're using that to generate the returns, you know, that's not the case at all, you know, that's active, deceit. You know, we are very, very open
about what we're doing. Like, I would very much Very strongly argue that that is not the case in so I don't like the term just because you know people that aren't in the industry will look at that term and think deceit whereas the reality is that you're pointing to a Mech like a mechanical thing and you know, I'm happy to debate on that. But yeah, I just wanted to throw that out there the second one.
So I think a really good analog here is literally like Bitcoin mining or pretty much any proof of work Network. Right, so to date, I actually put posted like a satirical tweet yesterday about this, and they went over a whole bunch of people's heads and they were firing back with like, oh, this is such a terrible take and I was like, yeah, you're right?
Like that was the point. But, you know, Bitcoin of mix every single day about 40 million dollars worth of bitcoin that is sold on the market to pay for mining operations to date. It has sold over, you know, twenty five billion dollars worth The Bitcoin, like, you know, at the value when it was emitted, that has been sold by minors to pay for electricity and equipment. And all of these things that, you know, there's no persistent value, really to the network of that.
You know, it is a expense that has to be paid just for operations. That is how I view mining or bonding, you know, the only difference in that relationship is that you know, we have the luxury of being on a, theorem a layer 1 so we don't have to pay for security. We don't have You know, treat that as a pure expense where that money is gone immediately and never coming back instead.
We can store it. You know, that's the only difference is that we can tap into it later in the future instead of just, you know, burning it essentially. But, you know, like I don't like that argument. Just because like it, you know, it insinuates. Like I would just ask like, how does Bitcoin work then? How did etherium spend the first seven years of its life in deeply net negative issue, herb, pasta?
Positive issuance where, you know, it's constantly being sold on the market, you know, and like you're not seeing any, there's no treasury there for you. Like, you know, how does any defy token that has pull two emissions work where you know, it's giving out tokens for free in those, get dumped on the market, like, you know, that
this Dynamic exists. So, pervasively everywhere and I would argue that Olympus is probably one of the best cases of it. It's one of the cases where it makes the most sense because you're actually storing that for the future rather than just burning the money away. And you see no benefit Beyond. Single point in time, you know, you spend like, like sushi, spent 250 million dollars last year on pool to incentives. And where is the benefit of that
today? You know, you don't see any benefit of it behind the single point in time, in which you gave the money out. Whereas in our case. We have six hundred million dollars in Assets. Now like, you know, essentially very similar missions where, you know, we grew our supply by 87%, they grew their supply by Scent and we have 600, plus times more to show for it today.
Then, you know, I don't know II. Think that it is honestly, one of the least Ponzi Dynamics, when you really think about it in that light because, you know, and every single, especially in like, defy mechanism relies on, you know, constant inflow of new demand to satisfy these incentives that you're pushing out for whatever. Activity. The last one that I was going to touch on is just the You the early money, peyser, late money, pays out, new money, dynamic in
itself. You can argue that at a single point in time, right? Of like, oh, like prices are like value appreciates. And, you know, to realize that you need new buyers to come into the market, you know, or that is true for if price is not going to depreciate, you know, if you want price to be flat, then you needed equal new demand for the supply that's coming onto the market again. The treasury is facilitating all this liquidity.
Where it will buy back, if external parties do not, but then it has reserves as well, where the dynamic that you actually see is, you know, early money pays new money, right? So, if someone came in, and they contribute, they bought bonds, and they contributed money to the treasury months ago, and then they left. And now the, the value of the network is greater and the treasury has to be tapped in either with the liquidity or the reserves. You're having the early money, pay the new money.
Now you flip the dynamic on its head. It's actually the opposite. We're like, I think that alone is like, okay, like You know, I just see this argument so much and I really don't think that a whole tub. Yeah, I would, I would totally give you that. I mean, what are you doing? Is transparent. I mean, it's not it's not a fraud and basically I think I truly believe that I mean no one's forced to go into this,
right. So, I mean it's not it's not like you're defrauding investors or anything at least in my view. But yeah, so basically, I think the term funds he is Yeah II do. Get your point that yeah. It there is a different connotation to it in this ecosystem than in most other settings. People are deep. I think using endearingly, which is like, you know, it's all
dangerous. Yeah, and we're kind of, we're running long, so I would love to keep going, but we kind of, we need to wrap so so so, what are you? Goals, for Olympus this year. A couple thing.
I'll throw some, some more like intangibles and then some specifics, you know, so one of the things that we're targeting is greater and greater like liquidity influence within the, the defying crypto ecosystem, you know, so one of the most important components of a currency is that it is, you know, the most, if not, one of the most liquid assets that you can find, you know, so we're aggressively are targeting
building up our liquidity. The influence not only in our own or in our own pools, but you know, capturing new projects, having a against us, you know, partnering with existing projects and having them move their liquidity with us. There's actually a new exchange that will I don't have a date to give but it's going to take like a pretty proactive stance on helping us facilitate that because there's a lot of upside.
I would consider for an exchange in, you know, partnering us with us in Endeavor, you know, there's very few projects and entities that have any interest in like actively growing decks liquidity. Besides another one is, you know, I think that we're probably going to start act or actively like utilizing the treasury or for like what I see the treasury as being able to provide, besides those like real, like tail risk Bank Run scenarios is that we can use it
to influence in central. Of structures in the market in artificial ways that might be beneficial to the market. So, you know, essentially you can have the protocol take positions that, you know, you don't want it to be this massive loss losing particular position, but it's something that a, rational actor in the market probably wouldn't do, you know, the best case in are the best like examples of this are just
when you have opportunity cost. So, you know, some some opportunity that, you know, still makes the treasury money, but you could have taken that money, put it somewhere. All this and more but you know in manners that like I'm working on this, like call strategy kind of thing where you know, the protocol can offer offer options in a manner that would be very hard to incentivize third parties to do on.
But there are intangible benefits to the the protocol and allowing it to you know, provide additional liquidity with lower cost and you know, provide new forms of exposure that you know, are kind of unique to our Market. Yeah, I think like another one is, just so we have this new Bond infrastructure. And with it, we can do this like, you know, or going to see if we do this. I haven't like proposed yet. But what I think I mentioned it before, like, net, a net structure on bonds.
So, rather than having it one way where you have, you know, only the protocol taking assets into the treasury and not the other way around, you know, switching into a net base system, where, you know every single day it is buying Million dollars worth of home and selling 11 million dollars worth of them. Instead of just selling one or 11 million dollars worth of over. Sorry, what, you know with that you are going to generate new activity and volume in the market.
You're going to provide additional liquidity where, you know, let's say that that is a day where there's more Supply in the market, you know, maybe it ends up actually, you know, buying back 13 million and selling 8 essentially like it creates a wider band, my expectation, at least of liquidity that allows Utility decompressed and, you know, single point in time like supply and demand to to sort itself out
better. You know, it's I view it in the very in a very similar Dynamic to what I was like, the, the water analogy with the staking rewards where you're like, diluting that dilution away similar, but with, you know, supply and demand in the market, there's this big Focus, you know, that I've been trying to push on the economy of Olympus. I call it the economy. With an H between the OEM but, you know, essentially like, you know, foreign currency to be
successful. It needs an economy around it. You know, I would like yeah, you know, you need to have D correlated, find an error, you need to have D correlated activity happening on top of you that has nothing to do with the currency itself. You know, it's just people transacting or trading or, you know, whatever, you know, so there's this massive push within the doubt that, you know, there's like an incubator program and grants and like,
really heavy. He Outreach to, you know, build up our economy around us. I would say, that's probably the single biggest one and that aligns with like the liquidity piece. Really. We're just trying to, we're trying to spread our wings within the industry. Cool, that's that's a lot of plans. So where can people go to find out more about you and Olympus Tao. Yeah, so you can go online. Olympus Del dot Finance.
The Twitter account is at Olympus Del, or there's a link on both to the Discord. That's like the main hub for, you know, Community activity. And, you know, if you have questions, if you want to meet people that are in the community, I would advise that that's probably the place to go. I believe there's an unofficial telegram group so I won't give any out for that, but it does exist. I kind of want to take that back. Now. Please make sure that you're on
the right one. I'm also on that note, just Throw out like, please, please. Please never interact with people that dmu first on Discord, or Twitter or telegram or any of these things, especially if they saying that they're a team member that there's support, any of these things is, doesn't this is not Olympus specific. It's anything in defy. They are trying to scam. You. They will take your money. Do not click links. You're not download and open
files, please. Like the number of people that have reached out to me and said, like I made one dumb mistake. I opened a link and my Madam asked God. Exploited and now I have no money. Like it. It breaks my heart every single time. Like please be careful, the Dark Forest out there. There's a lot of people looking to take advantage of you and you know, you gotta no one is going to look out for you except for yourself, but at Olympus doubt on pretty much everything. Thank you, Zeus.
That was a good last words. Thank you so much for coming on. Thank you. Thank you for joining us on this week's episode. We release new episodes every week. You can find a subscribe to the show on iTunes Spotify, YouTube SoundCloud or wherever you listen to podcast. And if you have a Google home or Alexa device, you can tell it to listen to the latest episode of the epicenter podcast. Go to epicenter, .t V /, subscribe for a full list of places where you can watch and
listen. And while you're there, be sure to sign up for the newsletter. So you get new episodes in your inbox as they're released. If you want to interact with us guests or other podcast listeners, you can On Twitter, and please leave us a review on iTunes helps people find the show and we're always happy to read them. Well, thanks so much and we look forward to being back next week.