Proposal 13: Re-Establish PIPT/USDC Pool on Uniswap


I propose the PowerPool Project offer an incentive for those that provide liquidity to a PIPT/USDC Uniswap Pool. PIPT is the trading token for the PowerPool Index which consists of 8 Major DeFi Projects. The rewards for users funding liquidity to this pool would be 250K CVP per month supplied by the PowerPool Treasury. Any CVP Rewards would be vested over 10 weeks. The following benefits should be achieved by passing this proposal; 1 - additional exposurer for the Token to Users who are most comfortable with the Uniswap interface, 2 - an additional low cost trading option, 3 - the ability for trading arbitrage benefiting both traders and liquidity providers 4 - increased price stability for the PIPT token by establishing a USDC trading pair and lastly 5 - Offering incentives to provide Liquidity thru another pool gives the community yet another reason to hold the PIPT Token.


Until the MainNet Launch, there had been a liquidity pool available on Uniswap to help with the adoption of the PowerPool Index Token - PIPT. That pool no longer exists. By re-stablishing this pool, it will offer another means to easily trade the token with low transaction fees. Currently if one purchases the token from, the Eth fees can run 40-50 dollars to purchase PIPT Tokens.

When looking to purchase the PIPT token at a much lower fee, an option does currently exist thru the Balancer Exchange. The issue with Balancer being the only low cost option is that most crypto investors aren’t nearly as familiar with that site versus using Uniswap. The differenent trading pairs - PIPT/ETH in the Balancer Pool vs PIPT/USDC in the New Proposed Uniswap Pool - could allow for price arbitrage benefiting traders as well as generating additional fees for the liquidity providers for both pools. In addition, offering a trading pair pegged to USDC can help provide price stability for the PIPT Token.

Offering an additional Liquidity Pool with Incentive Rewards gives yet another reason for the community to purchase and hold the PIPT token.


There may be a very good reason the team chose to eliminate an incentive for a Uniswap Pool. Possible reasons could include; Exclusivity agreement with the Balancer Project or Technical Issues with controlling price across multiple platforms (Balancer / Uniswap) with different trading pairs PIPT/ETH vs PIPT/USDC. Based on the teams response as to why incentives for a Uniswap Pool were eliminated could cause this proposal to be invalidated.


Reasonable, Alan.
I would vote FOR

Would be great to hear from the team.

My thoughts:


  1. Yes, USDC + PIPT pool is by definition exposed to IL (it was the main reason Delphi guys @YanDelphi propose to remove the rewards from it as I remember)…


  1. …But one of our key KPI is to grow PI TVL as fast as possible right? for this goal we need to make an access to PIPT as seamless as possible. And the route UNI->USDC->PIPT is the easier possible way to do so
    I think we can launch it as an experiment with 3 months timeline and then review the results
  2. So launching this pool we are subsidizing easy access to PI - I consider this as a strategic marketing cost
1 Like

But What I would change here is to introduce a reward pool for both Balancer and Uni PIPT/USDC tied to

  1. Liquidity provided
  2. Trading volumes

No need to stick to hard-coded 250k CVPs reward

Hey Sergey, Thanks for the feedback. You mentioned being exposed to “IL”. What does that mean? In your second post, you make mention of dynamically supplying CVP rewards to Liquidity Providers. The reason I set a fixed amount is all the other pools also offer a fixed amount of rewards so I didnt want to crreate a confusing situation for users providing liquidity across multiple Liquidity Pools.

Thanks again for your comments…

re IL: USDC is a stable coin, PIPT’s price is changing

This means that impermanent loss (IL) is inevitable

And thats why we should rewards the LPs in this pool with CVPs

Re the dynamic rewards - we have alredy seen the situation (in august/september) when out of 4-5 CVP pools across UNI and BAL shared proportional rewards, via some of those pools were totally useless.

Thats why I am sure this is OK if we rewards only the performing USDC/PIPT pool. if all the liquidity goes to this pool - its totally OK