For univ2 - rebasing tokens would not work; however, sOHM is the rebasing token & OHM is not (designed to be the unit of account).
OHM (while volatile) - is quite an active pair on Sushi. However, as mentioned, we are in progress of migration to v2. It would be best to wait - it should not take long for most of our liquidity to be in the new new version.
Agree on the list - and supportive of FEI given their recent v2 launch as well.
I would also suggest to open the protocol with a small allowed token list. this could be a good choice not only from a safety perspective but also from the token utility perspective.
the vision of Gearbox is to offer leverage as a service. a good go-to-market strategy could be like:
1, offer the service to a small group to prove the product-market fit and also as marketing.
2, gradually grow the customer base and community.
3, build a strong brand and make gearbox the center place for leverage.
in order to prove the product-market fit, I would recommend adding yvDAI and yvUSDC to the list. from the token utility perspective, instead of adding more tokens, I think we should discuss which token that ov3rkoalafied and vasilysumanov proposed could be excluded from the list. I would prefer them to come vote for the Gear service
Good afternoon, I see that there are 2 Uniswap contracts and 2 Yearn contracts but CRV only has 1. I believe it will be only fair to also add CRV Tricrypto2 pool for the following reasons:
Evenly distribute the number of contracts for each protocol.
This is my favorite pool which I have gotten liquidated many times and I want to use Gearbox to redeem myself.
It has the highest volume on a daily basis at over $100m/day, generates a modest 18% yield on Convex all while allowing a user to have exposure to both BTC and ETH making it a highly attractive pool to leverage.
Thank you for taking the time to read my post and I hope you have a nice day!