Proposal 48: Support PowerPool team expansion by team allocation raise

Summary
Update Proposal 10 and raise PowerPool team allocation from 5m CVP to 17.5m CVP - 17.5% of the total supply:

  • Make first 7.5% subject to original lock-up and vesting schedule - lock-up from 1st Dec 2020 to 1st Dec 2021 with linear vesting 18 months thereafter.
  • Make another 5% subject to the following terms: lock-up from 1st Dec 2020 to 1st June 2022 with linear vesting 18 months thereafter.
  • Make another 5% subject to the following terms: lock-up from 1st Dec 2020 to 1st Dec 2022 with linear vesting 18 months thereafter.

The main goals of this allocation raise are:

  1. Support project development and facilitate the growth of the team by means of token options
  2. Align PowerPool team allocation with historically proven market practices for Defi projects

Motivation
Current PowerPool team allocation was approved in Proposal 10 and is only 5m CVP (5% TTS) with 12 months lock-up and 18 months vesting. At the same time, the PowerPool team was seriously expanded in recent months. Up to date, eight people were hired (4 in the public team, 3 in SparkProd, and one in SparkData). The proposed PowerPool’s new vision requires hiring much more people to complete 9 DAO teams as it was specified in approved in Proposal 44.

However, Proposal 44 defines only operational budget (salaries and ongoing expenses), not token options for team members and workers. Current PowerPool team allocation -5% TTS is evidently not enough for paying sufficient token options for all team members, taking into account future hirings and team expansion.

Team tokens allocation acts as the main motivational tool for founders and team members for developing the project since they have a direct impact on their wealth based on project success. Typical team allocation in the Defi sector is something between 20 and 30%, according to publicly available data. I presented some references below:

Table 1. Team allocations in Defi projects

Project Team allocation Source
Compound 22.25% founding & team 3.72% future team members Total: 25.97% Compound Medium
Uniswap 21.51% Binance research
Balancer 25% - founders, options, team, advisors Balancer Docs
Synthetix 18.49% - team Binance Research
1INCH 22.5% - team 1inch website
Curve 30% team & investors 3% employees Curve docs

The absolute majority of other known Defi projects also allocate at least 15% for the team and contributors. It is not surprising - the only highly motivated team can achieve great success for the project, and team tokens play a primary role in this.

It is why I propose to raise PowerPool team allocation up to 17.5% with sufficient lock-ups and vesting schedule which is a conservative allocation taking into account the data presented above.

Specification
I propose to the CVP community to raise PowerPool team allocation by 12.5m CVP (12.5% TTS). The total team allocation will be 15m CVP (17.5% TTS) after that.

Since team tokens should be vested to align long-term incentives, I propose to update the vesting schedule as follows:

  1. Make first 7.5% subject to original lock-up and vesting schedule - lock-up from 1st Dec 2020 to 1st Dec 2021 with linear vesting 18 months thereafter.
  2. Make another 5% subject to the following terms: lock-up from 1st Dec 2020 to 1st June 2022 with linear vesting 18 months thereafter.
  3. Make another 5% subject to the following terms: lock-up from 1st Dec 2020 to 1st Dec 2022 with linear vesting 18 months thereafter.

Conclusion
I propose to raise team allocation originally specified in Proposal 10 by 12.5m CVP (12.5% TTS) up to 17.5m CVP (17.5% TTS) with the terms specified above. It should be done to align PowerPool team allocation with historically proven market practices, support project development, and facilitate the team expansion.

1 Like

I support this proposal. It has proven very difficult to recruit qualified Team Leaders and experienced team members based on salaries alone. Many qualified candidates want to ‘do their own thing’ despite the risks compared with aligning with a time-proven DAO like PowerPool. A larger Team Allocation will permit us to attract and align otherwise entrepreneurial team contributors, without penalising long-term Core Team and others who have moved the project forward to this point, despite team building problems with the original launch arrangements and subsequent managerial struggles. The case of Yearn is relevant here as well. Fair launch is fine, but once a protocol reaches the point PowerPool is at now, building the active asset management/analytics tracking organisation (and DAO governance platform) on top of the protocol software stack is the big challenge. Leading asset management DAOs have attracted vastly bigger management teams and associated contributors. We have leading technology and a solid strategy for growing asset management AUM/TVL, but now we need more PEOPLE.

I’m in favor of this proposal:

  1. Competition between DAOs is increasing rapidly, PowerPool need the ability to give good option packages to qualified members.

  2. Increased allocation better aligns incentives long-term.

Agree with the above sentiment. Resources are already in short supply and we should be well positioned to offer competitive packages.

I propose an amendment to the passed Proposal #48 that has been voted for on snapshot recently:

Goal (KPI) for SparkGrow:

Adding ~50 new governance members (= xCVP, respectively CVP holders/stakers) on average per month

Work plan

  • Targeting the right audience with the right messaging (different than KPI #1).
  • Engage with the relevant audience through sponsoring relevant content creation, Twitter, Telegram, etc.
  • Get more proposals for the wider Powerpool community to get involved with the governance.

Funds allocation (referring to Proposal 48)

  • The funds can be allocated to a unique account which will be under the control of a multisig of 3 out of 5 signers - 3 keys will be held by each of the SparkGrow members and 2 by the team.
  • A full report on the spent funds and their impact will be published at the end of each month by the SparkGrow. Probably should be even done retroactively.
  • The SparkGrow members will be eligible for total rewards of up to 20% of the SparkGrow fund (of $48k/month of 17.5k CVP - by the terms specified in Proposal 48 - in total to all members together) on achieving or exceeding the KPIs mentioned above.

I like the direction, But I think it should be a separate proposal

I think the idea to have KPIs for the SparkGrow team, and rewards for more members of SparkGrow are good. SparkGrow is divided between focussing on retail and institutional family office investors and the efforts are really quite separate, and both have different KPIs and staffing.

Rather than post this as an amendment to Proposal 48, it should be a separate Proposal from SparkGrow Team. Once we know the total Team Allocation and vesting schedules, ALL the Spark Teams should put forward Proposals stating KPIs like this one, so that we can ensure a balanced overall organisation and expand all the teams with incentives above and beyond just big xCVP bags.