I just want to kick off this conversation after @leighton 's blog post:
“It’s also possible for governance to incentivize more sponsorship by distribution POOL tokens to sponsorship depositors.”
Sponsorship funds contribute interest to the main pool but deposits in sponsorship are not entitled to receive tickets in return. This effectively makes it more appealing for users to deposit into the main pool since their odds are going to be very generous, even with a high reserve turned on. I would anticipate something like a 5:1 ratio of funds in the sponsorship contract versus the pool contract, maybe even higher.
I propose that we apply the POOL drip to only the sponsorship depositors for WBTC and USDT. I think something like 50 / day for WBTC and 200 / day on USDT for 3/6 months is what we will converge to over the coming months, but open to discussion on what number that should be too.
I have put in a chart so everyone can see how moving the drip reward to sponsorship completely can affect the APY of the main pool. This does not include the lootbox. This will make the expected value depositing into pooltogether for depositors 100’s of percent more appealing than depositing at the yield source. For example, if USDT is generating a 10% interest on compound or aave, at a 5:1 ratio your expected value would be 30% APY or 3x higher than at yield source.