Goal is to increase the trading volumes and to attract new makers and integrations to the AirSwap protocol. The proposal is to empower coordinators to selectively run rebate programs and onboarding packages for makers and integrations case by case in the interest of meeting volume targets.
- Any rebate proposed should be presented by the coordinators in the written way (Google Docs etc) and published in the members only channel in the Discord and/or Notion. Each rebate/incentive package must be voted on by the AirSwap community via a configuration vote.
- In that case the rebate amount could be selected by community config weighted voting with multiple choices for every rebate.
- 3 days are given for community discussion, if an agreement has been reached with the community Rebate proposal could be moved to vote for 24h.
- After the vote is done rebate/incentive package could be moved to discuss with target maker/aggregator.
- If the final agreement has been reached during this time, Rebate proposal could be implemented ASAP otherwise sent for revision for the next 3 days.
The example of how AirSwap is going with MM and why do we need rebates:
- MM charges 0.875% anyway from each trade
- So each DEX should adopt and consider that each trade done on their platform will additionally charge 0.875% so the platform should adopt its fee to stay competitive
- AirSwap prepaid fee to the MM (on some volume) and was charging 0.3% from each trade, which was 0.575% more competitive in relation to other DEXes which allowed makers to take that difference of <0.575% as profits
- Now AirSwap fee was reduced to 0.07% so there is almost no window for the makers now, thats why volumes and fees have dropped.
Rebate proposition could consist:
- Onboarding stimuli
- This would be an acknowledgement of the effort taken to get a server up and running, and serving orders. This could be split into two components:
- [Fixed amount] provided at least [X] swaps (number, not value) are served in [onboarding period].
- [Variable amount] based on $ volume over the most recent [measurement period] (could be removed and replaced with performance incentive below).
- Example with numbers
- Performance incentives
- Intended to reward reliability and/or performance. Any of the following:
- Fixed payment for server uptime, e.g. 99.99% → [10k AST] per month
- Payment for average daily volume volume given a [threshold] is met, e.g:
- 0 - [$500k] → 0
- [$500k+] → 0.035%
- The onus would be on the Makers to keep a log of all successful transactions in an agreed format that would allow us to verify $ values.
- Similarly uptime would need to be provided by makers based from an agreed third party service
- All payments could be determined whether makers or integrators would accept sAST (staked AST) or AST tokens with conversion from $ value done at the time of payment, or done in other way.
- The success of this system depends on attracting and keeping makers, so there is a balance to be struck between making the incentives attractive, but not so attractive that makers would come for the onboarding incentives then leave once they finish.
- I am assuming that paying retrospectively avoids the MetaMask fee increase effect when the incentives end.
Thanks to greypixel, astholder, agrimony, Justin, Don, zzew12 and Schalla for their contributions to this AIP
Copyright — All proposals are public domain via CC0.