RFP-7 proposes to adjust the protocol fee distribution in Radiant v2 by splitting it into three distinct buckets. Furthermore, this proposal seeks to reapproach the protocol’s handling of RDNT token vesting fees.
For this DAO proposal, the primary aim is to provide a stronger utility proposition for liquidity providers in Radiant v2 by increasing their share of the protocol fee stream, while concurrently reducing the dilutionary impact of vesting RDNT. This will be done while keeping base borrowing fees competitive with all major lending protocols.
In addition, this proposal seeks to leverage a portion of fee distribution in order to create a formalized incentive structure for DAO participants to maintain continued contribution toward the development of Radiant.
OpEx: Abbreviation for operational expenditure. Expenses a business incurs through its day-to-day operations. Operating expenses can include developmental costs, marketing, payroll, legal, step costs, and funds allocated for project reach and expansion.
The following protocol mechanic changes are being proposed for Radiant v2:
v1 Design:
v2 Design Proposal:
v1 Design: Both vesting RDNT and locked RDNT earn protocol fees.
v2 Design Proposal: Vesting RDNT will not earn protocol fees. Locked dLP will earn protocol fees with an increased distribution share.
The additional outlay and risk associated with locking up LP tokens for an extended period (as compared to single-sided locking in v1) justifies the increase in fee share for dLP lockers.
Adjustment to the base lending fees affords the protocol flexibility to incentivize dLP lockers while still maintaining competitive rates in line with all major lending platforms.
The OpEx allocation will mitigate pressure to use RDNT tokens to pay for operational initiatives. The initial team funded Radiant with no outside investment and over $1.5M spent. By earmarking an OpEx budget, the DAO can provide continued funding for future audits and exchange listings, pay the salaries of developers working on the project, and fund community-sourced work.
This aligns incentives through the DAO governance model, while ensuring that the project remains independent of external funding sources such as grants and VC investment.
Vesting RDNT that continues to accrue protocol fees has the effect of significantly diluting the fee revenue pool at the expense of those who have committed via locking LP tokens.
This change will have the net effect of improving lock utility vs. Radiant v1 and reducing dilution in the pool, as it redistributes fees away from vesting addresses to those who provide real value through locked liquidity.
If RFP-7 passes, a subsequent proposal will be brought forth to the DAO which will further outline the parameters of the OpEx fund.
This proposal will seek to define:
Likely some maintenance dev cost, no additional structured costs beyond existing time/resources spent in development.
Anticipated shift towards “sticky” capital and protocol longevity.
Implementation of fee redistribution and changes to vesting would go into effect upon launch of v2, and would deploy on all subsequent Radiant chains (current & future).