Why You Should Vote YES on Euro Currency Whitelist

The community should vote yes current whitelisting proposal for Euros for several reasons:

  • Expands the mAsset types – right now we only have stocks & crypto. Adding Euros expands mAssets into currencies which is the largest market in the world and can be more difficult for retail traders to access (i.e. lots of demand).
  • Provides Hedging – most blockchains (and all mAssets) are USD denominated. Adding Euros allows all EU investors to hedge currency risk. This will pull in demand from all across Terra (and other blockchains once integration is easier). This demand will vary as the crypto market moves, meaning people will actively buy & sell (i.e. significantly higher fee generation than current mAssets).
  • Already available on Band – unlike other proposals that are forced to hope Band adds the ticker, Euros are immediately available to be registered and thus trading can begin quickly.
  • Mirror Needs to Keep Growing – as someone who’s invested & participated in a wide variety of crypto projects, one of the biggest success keys is growth. Once growth stops, people change platforms. Mirror is still in its infancy and people want to see that it’s an actively expanding platform. New asset classes will show that.

Common reasons against listing:

  • “It’s dilutive to the other pools!” – True but shortsighted. Mirror as a platform is pretty worthless if we just have a handful of stocks. Thus Mirror needs to expand if it will survive so this isn’t a valid reason against growth.
  • “It’s too similar to current mAssets” – Not the case here. This would be a brand new asset class.
  • “People will just use it to farm rewards!” – Those people will always do that, in any pool. Euros will be a net positive to the platform since it can act as a hedging tool and thus has real incentive to be actively traded (unlike stocks which many people are happy to just buy & hold).

TL;DR: Euros will drive accretive value to Mirror due to it’s trading incentive (active hedging management), unique value (no other Euro-assets on Terra), and proof Mirror is serious about expanding (TVL growth). It’s already on Band so let’s get it launched!

1 Like

Thanks for putting out a thread to follow through your proposal

I’m not sure I follow the approach of whitelisting an asset already existing on the Terra chain : what’s the benefit of trading mEUR versus EUT (Terra Euro stable) ?

Good point but right now EUT isn’t traded much (seemingly anywhere) so it doesn’t provide much value if it’s difficult to find/use. Not even on TerraSwap. Isn’t listed at all on CoinGecko or CoinMarketCap.

Mirror is a hub for other projects (Nebula, Mars - including yesterday’s announced Fields) so it’s important we have an mAsset for it. Going direct to an oracle provides better price accuracy than an extra step via another unbacked token.

The major win will be for MIR since the trading fees will be paid to MIR holders and it should be an mAsset that see much more in-and-out trading.

Mirror Protocol uses Terraswap DEX. Trading fees are paid to LP’s, not to MIR holders.

All mAssets trade against UST. 0.30% trading fee each way (0.60% round trip) discourages active trading in EURUSD pairs.

The current price stamp for EURUSD is 1.18673. ± 0.30% creates a range of 1.18317-1.19029. While EURUSD traded below this range on 28 Jul, the last time that it traded above was 29 Jun. A one-month holding period just to cover swap fees is prohibitive to active trading.

This could be a good mAsset after Mirror v3 is released if it supports lower trading fees, but it doesn’t make any sense for Mirror Protocol as it currently works.

The Long Farm goes to the long farmers but the CDP fee goes to MIR holders. So yes, trading fees will go to MIR holders

I’m not saying people will trade price movements, they’ll trade hedge movements – if I own $1,000 of LUNA and that changes to $1,500 then I need to hedge an additional $500 of currency risk (i.e. buying more mEUR). Same works in the opposite direction. The .3% fee doesn’t change this so Mirror V3 doesn’t matter.

By your logic none of the current assets should be listed because the trading fee is higher than trading off of Mirror.

That’s a borrowing fee, not a trading fee.

This is the logic that I was directly responding to. I argued that it will not have more in-and-out trading than other assets, because daily variation (and monthly variation) are much lower for EURUSD than they are for most Mirror assets.

Terraswap Dashboard shows 7-day volume for all Terraswap pools, along with the commission APR (trading fees) earned for each.

The 5 most active mAssets by volume are mBABA, mSLV, mAMZN, mTSLA, and mGOOGL.
The 5 highest fees fee APR are mETH, mBTC, mBABA, mGLXY, and mCOIN.

If you put any of these against EURUSD on a relative value chart, EURUSD price will look like a flat line in comparison. You can see which one is EURUSD because it has the least movement…

SInce you did not understand my argument the first time, let me make it more clear:
EUR does not have enough price volatility to be a good mAsset. the 0.60% round-trip trading fees and 1.50% collateral fees are better suited for higher volatility mAssets.

Unless you want Mirror to be a yield farming platform instead of a trading platform for synthetic assets. In that case, the less active the asset the better. In fact, lets mirror USDC, USDT, and DAI so we can farm those against UST!

Semantics. Apologies for using the wrong phrase

See below where I respond to that.

I perfectly understand your point. I fully accept that EUR has less volatility than the other assets and that day trading it to make a profit based on price movements is pointless because of the .3% each way fee – we agree here.

But a similar point applies to all of the stock positions – why would I pay .6% + premium movement when I can just buy the same thing on Robinhood for free? You’re argument disputes the value of Mirror as a trading platform, not why we should/shouldn’t list Euros. Then with crypto assets, why buy synthetic crypto when you’re already on the blockchain?

You seem to only want Mirror to be a meme-stock, high yolo platform “for trading” rather than recognizing it as a protocol that has a diverse set of mirrored assets that fit a broad range of short & long term investors.

I voted YES. I’ve traded currencies before and it’s very difficult to find a broker you can really trust – most screw you over in some way or another.

Personally, not too worried about the .3% fee – markets regularly have a bid ask spread which can suck for retail. Lost more from brokers screwing me than I have in spreads

I hope this does not pass. I see no point in having mEUR when the entire point of Terra is to have a network-native stable coins. We have EUT, that’s it.

Nebula, mars, and other projects, while they build on top of mirror, they also integrate with UST directly, meaning there’s nothing limiting them from integrating EUT too.

Having mirrored versions of stablecoins would just introduce confusion, add complexity and split liquidity and development focus.

6 Likes

I don’t see the point to this proposal because we already have EUT.

Secondly, this asset is not very volatile. It will be a lay-up for farm and dumpers. If it does manage to pass I will certainly delta neutral farm it because of basically no impermanent loss…

1 Like

Well you can’t short EUT and EUT isn’t traded on Mirror

By that logic we shouldn’t have anything but YOLO assets

I think this is an interesting proposal. I’m not going to comment directly on the listing proposal itself but more on the point of the adoption of other Terra stablecoins other than UST

To start, I agree with the fact that UST is currently clear dominant stablecoin on Terra right now whereas others, including EUT, sees much less adoption and utility.

However, I don’t see that as a reason for us to create a new asset to replace it and hope that the new one gets adopted more. Instead, I suggest that we try to solve the underlying ‘issue’ and find ways to bring more use cases and attention to the other Terra assets.

Risking over-simplification, whichever protocol supports UST would have no technical reason why they cannot support other Terra assets such as EUT as well, since behind the scene they are (AFAIK) all standard Cosmos SDK based tokens.

Some ideas, taking EUT as an example of all Terra stablecoin, might be:

  • proposing to list EUR-UST pair on Terraswap/Astroport/any other upcoming/future DEXes/AMM
  • whitelisting EUT a collateral option on Mirror, perhaps on future iterations/V3
  • Having mAsset-EUT pools available on Mirror
  • Listing EUT as a market on Mars
  • proposing Nebula ETFs which includes EUT/other stablecoins, or even a full-on forex/Terra stablecoin ETF

All of these in my understanding are possible, but of course with varying degrees of difficulty. However, as Terra continue to grow, I believe that it is worth starting to think about the adoption and potential use cases for other Terra assets as well.

At the end of the day, increased adoption of other Terra alongside UST will only benefit the ecosystem in the long run.

1 Like
  1. If someone wants to be short EUR/USD how does one do that?

  2. MIR needs to have utility outside of a bunch of American stocks. Currency pairs are a trillion+ dollar market. Some DEXs are already trying to disrupt that particular sector. Why can’t MIR be part of it or ahead of it?

Mars protocol will launch in a matter of months that would allow you to whitelist EUT to short.

The problem is mEUR is just a capital inefficient form of EUT that will quickly be obsolete.

Wasting MIR token emissions on assets with no long term value doesn’t make any sense.

It would be much better in the long run to build a separate dapp on Terra that uses the actual stablecoins to speculate on FX pairs.

1 Like
  1. You don’t have a very liquid way to do that currently in the Terra ecoverse, but in any case:

  1. Agree as well, but Mirror was not designed to be a forex market either, and we should build on the foundations that already exist (EUT, other Terra stables) rather than creating a duplicate asset that will have limited upside for Mirror and fragment the already small mcap of EUT.

I encourage you to explore this thread instead :

1 Like

You HOPE that Mars will be capital efficient and that it’ll immediately support EUT right away (which Mirror still doesn’t). mEUR wouldn’t have been quickly obsolete but that’s irrelevant now that the whales have spoken