The genesis round is a separate pool so from the programmatic sales a total of approx 2M was sold in Origins leaving approx 1.5M for this strategic round and a future potential sale of about 600K
2 Likes
Awesome thanks for clarification.
Just edited my response cause I noticed that the way I phrased it might be confusingā¦
I fully support this deal. 12000 satoshi seems fair given the value add that Pomp and his team bring.
To protect the community at large, I recommend to increase the cliff to 1 year!
7 Likes
It is great to see Pomp expressing his interest in SOVRYN. This means a lot to those who are already involved in the project and most importantly to the team that is doing an amazing job. The SIP proposal is interesting indeed and it will bring a lot of benefits to the SOVRYN ecosystem.
I personally do not have any objection to this SIP proposal, I like it and I am going to vote YES. Obviously, Pomp is representing many big investors and if the vote pass they are going to be part of SOVRYN and help the project to grow which is very good indeed.
My only minor objection is the cliff, I would like it more if the āāpomp vesting periodāā starts the moment the GENESIS sale vesting period ends (Oct/Nov 2021). In any case, it is very good to see influencers like Pomp to be attracted by SOVRYN, great times ahead!
6 Likes
Great suggestion about changing the vesting period cliff, if this change was accepted and implemented, I could also see myself fully supporting Pompās proposal (despite my previous reservations about the investment size).
2 Likes
Hi, this is certainly very exciting and it can become a turning point to the whole RSK and DeFi for Bitcoin narrative, not only Sovryn but to the entire ecosystem which in turns again benefits Sovryn
But I do have few points that Iām not very clear: Is there any drawback?. If this goes for voting what are we voting for?. so here are few points:
- Is the price/SOV what would need to be accepted? or the vesting schedule?
- Is the quantity and voting power that one entity would have after the agreement what we need to evaluate?. (What would be the voting power in that case?)
- Is the fact that there is not enough tokens available at this point? in which case Pomp would need to confirm if they can start with a smaller part?
I think all thatās written Iām cool and it looks aligned to what Iām hear from most of the folks here at Sovryn, so I donāt see a missalignment (although I personally wish we can solve liquidity without creating another rBTC type) but with that aside, it all looks good and the only thing I would be careful is with ensure we remain decentralized so then all decisions for the future will still require community agreement. If that can be secured then Iād love to have Pomp sponsoring this. It can become a great story for Sovryn
4 Likes
About the voting power - if the SOV purchased in the strategic round is used as collateral for the BTC peg, then they wont be staked in governance, meaning that these investors would have to wait until their SOV becomes unlocked and then stake in Bitocracy in order to vote.
5 Likes
thanks Armando, ok that is an important clarification
Spot on! We would more than welcome Pomp aboard, but 1.5M is too much in the hands of too few, and SOV is not about that!
7 Likes
Dear Pomp
Welcome aboard the Sovryn fleet! It was a distinct pleasure to read this SIP; I fully support it and look so much forward to seeing it all delivered. I have every confidence that this will be amazing!
Best regards!
Alex
1 Like
Iām in awe for this great news and the proposal looks great, thereās so much value for Sovryn as a project in the syndicate intentions that it would be foolish to torn our back to it.
I agree with others that, for such a large and influential entity owning a huge % of the token supply, we shall consider a longer cliff period. Maybe 1year is excessive given that there will also be a linear vesting, but 6 months seems to be ore reasonable.
3 Likes
Anthony Pompliano is huge for the sovryn community no doubt about it. But the amount is needed to be adjusted for the projects sake.
4 Likes
This gonna explode with btc
Happy to read this news. Welcome to community Pomp. Im looking forward to voting on this prop.
Wow this is great news, love to see it 
the number of tokens sold and price seem fair considering how much value Pomp and co will bring to the table.
2 Likes
Very exciting news. I am very supportive of having Pomp and team involved for numerous reasons. The price seems fair also. One item I donāt understand is the vesting. It is written two different ways in the SIP (one with linear and one without).
Can you define better what this means: " 16 month linear vesting with a 3 month cliff" and āThe SOV will vest over 16 months with a 3 month cliffā
Is it a linear 16 month vesting (straight line) with a further 3 month cliff lockup release? What/how much is 16 months straight lined vesting vs 3 month cliff? So free of all constraints after 19 of 16 or months? Sorry, just not sure what is being proposed.
In any case, hopefully this is welcome to the team Pomp!
1 Like
it is 1.5 percent of the total supply. āsmall holdersā from origins (3000 +/- unique wallet addresses) hold collectively 2 percent. This is not a āsmallholderā vs āwhaleā conflict, and Sovryn is not an ICO coin.
1 Like
āthree month cliffā means that no tokens are unlocked for three months, and that after those three months, 1/16th is unlocked per month.
this 1/16th that is unlocked per month is spread amongst all members of the syndicate, who will each choose whether or not to sell them; they are not controlled by one monolithic user.
Some of those members are exchanges. Where else should exchanges get SOV to put on their exchange for the public at large to buy, and set the price on?
I understad that everyone is traumatized by pump and dumps, rugpulls, and every other scam in the book, but why would it be in an exchangeās interest to DUMP their percentage of the 1/16 of the coins on teh market in a project that they are bonding 10M in BTC on the platform for the length of the vesting period, in order to get their percentage of fees generated by trading on the platform?
Itās illogical to think that this syndicateās investors only interested in buying at 12k and dumping at 20k.
This is literally peanuts worth of tokens for the amount of volume hourly on each platform.
Itās not even a rounding error on their radar.
The value of SOV to them is all the bridging of other coins trading towards sovryn, in driving liquidity TO Sovryn.
Additionally, if an exchange syndicate member chooses to sell their % of SOV, what they are also selling is the right to VOTE that the token represents, reducing their voting power, which gets transferred with the token to the purchaser. Their other Sovryn choice is to stake it ON the sovryn platform, retaining their voting power (also weighted more strongly the longer they stake), and receiving their percentage of fees generated by trading on the platform (also weighted more strongly the longer they stake).
SOV is a Governance Token, and a participation in the financial rewards of trading happening on the platform.
The Sovryn āpitchā if you want to call it that, is that this is more valuable than selling, so, syndicate members of this class of stakeholders will be weighing carefully how much voting / earning power they want to give up in order to profit on the sale of the token in comparison to the purchase price.
My bet is that they all understand this, and want to be a valuable stakeholder group interested in the long term viability of the earn-on-platform / governance token model of the Sovryn protocol.
12 Likes
Very helpful and to understand the shorter than some want cliff. Did I miss the ā10M in BTC on the platform for THREE YEARSā or is it somewhere else? With those couple of facts and giving the exchanges some SOV to sell, I like the proposal. Nice explanation.