Vote to Discontinue plsJones

Single choice vote: Discontinue plsJones and allow redemption of assets

Overview

As promised, we will address plsJONES in our effort to streamline, simplify, and grow Plutus. Following discussions both in our Discord, separate working groups, and with the Jones team we still see a potential plsJONES in the future - but only in case the upcoming tokenomics make sense, and on the other hand if a stable governance partnership with liquidity services is what Jones want to couple with their token. We also know that in its current form there is no sense in keeping the JONES-WETH CLP "locked" as a plsASSET because it has no utility and is itself a liquid asset.

In case of a new plsJONES it would be crafted, released, and converted as its own product. It would attract its own liquidity, if the market sees a need for it. We do not see a reason to hold the current plsJonesies bound to a potential future any longer than they have been already.

As a service to our users, we are also going to propose some sort of redemption model for all plsASSETs. This ensures peg and thus the risk related to wrapping assets has a baseline.

This proposal is not centered on that and the model chosen here is not going to reflect on other plsASSETs. The ones not speculative in nature have a reason to exist and are going to require different methods.

This proposal and the discussion around it is still going to help us craft a framework for proposing future exit routes and failsafes for other plsASSETs.

The following topics are presented in their respective sections:

• Current state of plsJONES
• PLS emissions and accrued xGrail
• A potential future plsJONES
• Redemption

---

Current state of plsJONES

PlsJONES was supposed to be a liquid locker to veJONES. VeJONES never saw the light of day and therefore plsJONES is not earning any yield nor does it have utility in governance. PLS incentives have expired a long time ago and the swap ratio between the underlying JONES-WETH CLP and plsJones has at times been down to less than 10%.

Understandably, plsJONES holders have felt trapped in a useless ‘liquid' locker.

Demand for plsJONES won’t improve as long as the underlying token Asset doesn't yield. We can conclude that there currently isn’t any added value for a liquid locker like plsJONES.

---

PLS emission and xGrail

Since the launch of the product, plsJONES stakers have received approximately 440k $PLS and plsJONES liquidity providers have recieved approximately 240k $PLS based on this Dune query and related table by sigrlami.

After migrating to Camelot, the underlying pool also yielded xGrail which was distributed to plsJONES stakers as GXP. Considering the untransferrable quality of the tokens, and the emitted $PLS over the time not being discounted from the redemption, the GXP will stay with Plutus and be claimable as plsGRAIL once the product comes live.

However, in the event of plsGRAIL not being released by the end of 2024, the GXP related xGrail will be claimed by Plutus from plsJones converted plsJONES holders or distributed to them through other means. The specifics will be presented as their own proposal in the event of plsGRAIL being delayed or not ending up being pursued.

---

A potential future plsJONES

The Jones team is working on new tokenomics and in the case of those new tokenomics being favourable, and the Jones team finding a fit for LSD collaboration with Plutus, we will reconsider launching a new plsJONES. All plsASSETS will be considered as beneficial to all three parties involved:

1. plsASSET holders (LP and Staking)
2. plsASSET providers
3. bPLS holders (Plutus DAO)

If Jones' new tokenomics utilize locking and have a div stream, plsJONES makes sense.

---

Redemption

We fully understand if plsJONES holders are tired of waiting and want to exit. Pending the result on this proposal, we open up 1:1 redemptions and discontinue plsJONES as it currently stands. We also feel that speculative tokens, namely plsJONES and plsARB, are a protocol killer and should be discontinued.

However, while not setting this proposal nor the plsARB redemption as precedent for non-speculative plsASSETs, we plan on introducing a redemption model for them all.

The following illustrative example is in no way binding before a proper proposal is published and passes voting. The main goal is to offer an exit at a discount and at a faster pace than the underlying asset would be redeemable, while simultaneously creating > 100% underlying yield on your plsASSETS and giving you a calculable floor price relative to the underlying asset for your risk as an investor.

Example plsASSET redemption:

project XYZ has a 4 yr lock. plsXYZ offers a redemption at 90% at a shorter timeframe, e.g. instant or a month. A user uses this redemption possibility and gets bought out with yield from the pool, or through collaborative mechanics between Plutus and the plsASSET provider, XYZ. Out of this 10% stake left in Plutus: 90% (9% nominal) gets distributed as yield to remaining plsXYZ users and 10% (1% nominal) remains in the pool as treasury owned plsXYZ. The yield on treasury owned plsXYZ gets split 3 ways between plsXYZ users, bPLS, and the protocol treasury. Ultimately the true "blackhole" is the protocol bought back plsASSET that provides for remaining protocol users.

---

Proposal

Discontinue plsJONES and offer a 1:1 redemption with the underlying. Consider distributed $PLS as a rent on the held assets over the lifetime of the product and keep the GXP underlying xGrail as an entry ticket to plsGrail if it is released before EOY2024.

Option 1: 'For'

Discontinue plsJONES as described in the heading paragraph of this (Proposal) section.

Option 2: 'Against'

Do not discontinue plsJONES as described. New proposal is drafted for further options.

Option 3: 'Abstain'

Count towards the quorum while not taking a stance.