The idea is to create one 12 month long yield dollar synth backed by renBTC, WBTC, WETH, etc. There would still be one EMP contract per collateral, but they would all mint the same synth.
It seems doable based on the code, each EMP keeps track of their tokensOutstanding without relying in synth totalSupply, but some changes would be necessary for the token and emp factories. After quickly going through the code, it seems that there are not that many changes to be made:
copy of createToken but keeping TokenFactory as token owner
gives an existing EMP mint and burn roles over the token
same as createExpiringMultiParty without resetting owner
I havent thought that much about tokenomics and edge case scenarios, the goal here is to consider the idea and try to figure out how this would work in all the diff scenarios.
- Less fractured liquidity.
- Rewards are easier to calculate and distribute.
- “Impact”. Better to advertise a XXXm product than multiple ones with less TVL.
- Peg risk is distributed between all emps and holders. What would happen if one of the pegged type of collaterals loses its peg?
- Non sponsors holding the synth at expiry may end up having to redeem for a collateral they dont want because other EMPS have already been emptied.
- Probably more things, and that’s what this topic is about.
This proposal goes in tandem with Proposal: Using curve.fi metapools for synths pegged to ERC20 tokens which proposes the creation of a curve.fi metapool with 3pool and the proposed synth.