Need more tokens paired with MIR

Can we have liquidity mining pools that use MIR as a base pairing instead of UST?

For example I would love to see liquidity pools such as, LUNA-MIR, and ANC-MIR, mETH-MIR, mBTC-MIR, mAMZN-MIR and etc. By having more pools paired with MIR instead of UST, it will increase demand for MIR and will lock up more MIR inside LPs; which is good for the price of MIR.

2 Likes

This idea seems like a good one to appreciate the price of Mir! I like it!

The problem right now is MIR can only go back into the MIR-UST LP, or staked in governance which causes the yield to drop overtime. Having other pools that require MIR as a base paring is great for the price of MIR. I suggest removing the mAssets that are low in demand to free up more MIR to be distributed into pools that require MIR as a base. This way demand should keep up with supply because you’ll always need more mirror to keep growing your yield if the pool demands it. Right now UST is in demand more than MIR which causes MIR to be sold for UST, currently all the yield farming uses UST. There is also guaranteed impermanent loss by pairing volatile assets with a stable coin like UST.

I feel like this is a bad idea as it increases exposure to impermanent loss by having another variable price asset in the pair, and will have people wanting more yield to compensate for the added risk. There are several mAssets that are quite stable or have cyclical value such that IL risk is at a minimum. If those were instead paired with UST suddenly LPs have to factor in predictions of MIR value.

Besides I think any decision about changing stuff should come post v2 after such a time when the impact of that can be determined. Note also that Spar will increase demand for mAssets and have additional effects on MIR supply and demand and hence price.

2 Likes

I think brilliant idea for MIR and the ecosystem. I would vote yes!

UST based LPs are there to provide liquidity for Terraswap AMM to facilitate trading mAssets against UST. MIR based LPs mean that you force people to trade mAssets against MIR. In this way, it would be very hard to compare the price of mAssets against its underlying assets. It might be an appealing idea for MIR holders but mAsset traders won’t like the idea at all.

1 Like

How is it any different than having a BTC/ETH trading pair? If nothing else it would provide more arb opportunities, which generates more fees.