MATIC integration as the HIGHEST PRIORITY

New Product Ideas
1

Hi guys, @powerpoolAdmin, @Sergey, @YanDelphi and others,

I am sure that you are very well aware of the current status of Ethereum mainnet and what insane fees each user has to pay for even a simplest transaction. We all know that there was a plan to integrate Matic to most of the PowerPool functionalities, and I even asked about this several times (here in the forum and discord as well) but did not get satisfying answer, especially from PP team members. And because of this (for me a bit disappointing) lack of official information or even simple roadmap with at least estimates on when this could be carried out, I have decided to start this topic.

I think the Matic integration should be the highest priority now, because its absence hamper the normal functioning of the PowerPool. It is crazy thing that one must pay so much money in Ether for depositing, claiming, redeeming or even voting. This must be changed ASAP!

Please understand that this is not only extra-frustrating for us, PP user, fans and believers, but also crucial for the survival and success of the PP visions. I know that this also troubles users of other Dapps but that should be an extra motivation for us to evolve. I believe this is now more important than anything else, even more that setting up a new ASSY index to attract more TVL. Having the Matic integrated would be the great selling point for so many users of other DeFi plarforms, who could come to us and thus increase TVL even in the current indexes.

So by this post I politely ask to be provided with official information from the PowerPool team with enough details on WHEN the Matic integration is to be expected (or at least provide and estimate) and WHAT functionalities are to be run on Matic (I would expect not only voting, but also deposit, claim, withdraw and redeem functions).

If this above information is not provided with satisfying details I am going to submit a proposal binding for PowerPools team and devs to integrate the Matic solution within 1 month from successful approval of the proposal.

You are all welcomed for discussion and support of this idea, and especially the PowerPool team to submit their statements on this clarifying their possibilities and priorities and thus being honest and transparent with the expectations of the community.

3 Likes
2

I belive matic and xdai integration is coming. Personally i believe xdai integration is better. Its chain is being utilized much more than matic (correct me if im wrong), also its tech is better than matic. I do not own xdai or matic just my opinion on which is better if only one can be prioritized

1 Like
3

Hi, Glow!
PowerPool team here.

Yes, gas fees are insane. Yes, we know it and we want to make costs of using PowerPool as low as possible.

Let’s discuss how we can utilize Matic network in the project:

  1. PowerPool indexes on Matic
  2. CVP trading on Matic
  3. LP mining contract on Matic
  4. Voting on Matic (especially taking into account meta-governance for >10 protocols with a lot of proposals in future)

So, let’t discuss every possible use-case

1. Why PIPT YETI ASSY cannot be launched at Matic
All liquidity is a Ethereum mainnet. The main reason is chain security - people don’t want to transfer dozens of millions dollars to the chain with current market cap of $99m. The chain MCap should be significantly higher than total value of assets, circulated on it. Also, PowerIndexes are productive indexes. It means that indexes providing cashflows to index holders using two basic mechanisms: (1) AMM swap fees (2) Vault strategies for composite tokens. Also, indexes require swaps to be balanced by arbitrage.
For (1) we need secondary markets on Uniswap (any other AMM exchange) to allow people to swap every composite token if there is arbitrage gap (to balance the index) or just to do swap for personal purposes. NO such markets on matic, no liquidity for that.
For (2) we need to place tokens directly into protocols. Obviously it is not possible to place YFI AAVE SUSHI into staking contracts in these protocols from L2 chain.
Both (1),(2) problems cannot be solved by L2<->L1 transfer as it is too slow and sometimes buggy (as it was clearly demonstrated in Alpha Beta Gamma testing rounds of PowerPool). It simply doesn’t work fast enough.
====> so NO PIPT YETI ASSY indexes at L2 at the moment.

But, we can launch L2-tokens indexes!
The only exception is for index based on tokens of projects, initially launched on L2 and having liquid AMM markets at L2.

Let’s launch L2 index - make a proposal for that! Select several valuable L2-based ERC20 tokens, and make first-ever L2 index.

Waiting for your ideas here.

2. CVP trading on Matic
It can be done - anybody can list CVP at L2 exchange based on AMM, there are several of them. Waiting for your suggestions.

3. LP mining on Matic
We will be happy to make LP mining on Matic for L2 index tokens/LP tokens of CVP pair on L2. It can be released in 1-2 days. No audits required.

4. Voting on Matic
We can do this, but it will seriously mess our roadmap and delay other products. Let’s delay this - no chance to do it fast now (and also it requires audits)

Let’s proceed this discussion and act asap. We are ready!

3 Likes
4

Fantastic response, team! Great info

5

Thanks for the quick response, I really appreciate that. Since I am not an IT guy, my technical input is very limited, but I can share my user experience, visions and ideas that might be further elaborated by more technical guys and serve as a basis for further discussion.

I would suggest to implement what can be implemented quickly and with high level of security. As an ordinary PowerPool user I need to do basic operation (deposit, claim, withdraw, redeem and vote) with low fees or at least to have a reasonable alternative to this. Do I get it right that (for example) as a CVP/ETH LP provider I could make costless operations (as stated in the previous sentence) by integrating point 2 and 3 (CVP trading on Matic and LP mining on Matic) or I miss the idea of the technical feasibility?

6

There are no tech limitations to launch CVP-ETH pair on Matic network, deploy LP mining contract there and allow to receive CVP rewards for that. But, the current reservoir is on Ethereum mainnet and it wouldn’t be connected with rewards Reservoir on Matic. If we want to develop such an integration (cross-chain liquidity mining) it will take time (and it is no easy task I can say), audits, etc.

So all we can do fast is to launch a separate liquidity pool on Matic and a separate liquidity mining program for this pool. Note, that if you want to add CVP there you should transfer it from ETH to Matic (and spend gas costs for that), and if you want to get it back on Ethereum you should spend gas costs one more time + pay the Matic bridge fee. So, finally, purchasing CVP at Matic probably wouldn’t save you a lot of money as you finally should transfer it to Ethereum mainnet.

Let’s think about it. All “issues” here are related to user experience and bridge gas costs. And to limited liquidity of course.

1 Like
7

@Glow Just to clarify, your issues are high gas fees with:

  1. Withdrawing (any token).
  2. Voting.
  3. Depositing.
  4. Minting Index tokens.
  5. Melting Index tokens.

I understand you may want Matic or some specific integration solution, but it severely hampers the system and causes centralization issues. For example, you need liquid spot prices to appropriately do 4-5. Does Matic have a large enough liquidity pool? Also, voting would largely have to be trusted by Matic. Remember, we have our own internal voting, and the voting of the underlying pool tokens. You would have to move all the pool tokens and vote with them, and they would have to move off the L2 chain onto Ethereum to execute votes. This could get quite clunky, and it would also be an issue relating to 4-5, since if you minted and melted on L2, you need to have access to the pool tokens on L2 at all times, and it won’t be there.

A slight aside:

A common issue with complex systems is to look at issues and say, “This is bad we should fix this.” You end up trying to find a solution that’s actually worse, as in it adds features that need more complexity and more maintenance. This seems to be striking its head here. While I agree, gas is annoying, trying to come up with solutions to fight gas is just as annoying. A few of the issues you provided are in some sense solved:

  • Don’t mint Index tokens.
  • Only buy and sell on L2.
  • Participate in governance during low gas times.

If you do this, gas won’t be too large of an issue.

1 Like
8

for governance we have two solutions:

  1. snapshot approach (but we need to add LP tokens to it, as now nobody could use LP tokens for voting in snapshots)
  2. L2 Voting

The first is fast and easy, the second is better, but requires development/testing/audits. So L2 will be developed further.