The core mission of the Piteas team is to strive towards creating new products to advance and expand Pulsechain. In this context, leveraging our ecosystem experience along with community feedback, we're taking steps to bring some of the products needed by the ecosystem to life with Pday.
It's important to note that both Piteas and Pday share the same development team behind them. Although there is inherently an organic connection between the two protocols, they operate independently in terms of accounting and decision-making.
We anticipate some questions from the community, so we want to share some of our thoughts here to address them 👇
There was already a sacrifice round for Piteas before, why are you doing it again for Pday?
As mentioned, each protocol will have its own accounting, so we believe it's necessary to evaluate each process separately. However, let's delve a bit deeper to address any lingering questions.
This isn't a meme or hyped protocol; we're building an economy. There will be an intensive development process lasting 4-6 months, and it needs to be financed.
The community has seen what we've built with Piteas with a small budget, and we receive praise for it frequently. It's clear that this time we need a bigger budget because we're hiring new talent. So far, we've agreed to contracts with 2 back-end devs, 1 front-end dev, 1 server-side dev and a computer scientist for consultancy in the AI phase. As you can imagine, the annual salaries of these individuals are high. Remember that 1inch has a core team of ~15 people and over 70 contributors; as Piteas, we've produced a product of that level with a team of 4. We'll go through a similar process for the new project. Having talented and not overly greedy developers is crucial.
There are some community prejudices about the sacrifices on Pulsechain, what do you say about this?
We understand the community's cautious approach to this issue, but we'd like to say a few things to dispel these prejudices on our behalf.
Piteas is a non-forked, native product developed entirely by our team, considered one of the most difficult to develop in the DeFi space. Nevertheless, our team developed Piteas entirely using their own resources and launched it after completing all audits. This makes it the first project to be launched before a sacrifice on Pulsechain. During the sacrifice process, the community showed lower participation than expected (partly due to the SEC decision being around the same time), and we had a budget of ~$550K post-TGE. Additionally, we'd like to mention that the funds from the protocol treasury were also sacrificed.
Ultimately, with this limited budget, we launched PTS, and as of March 2024, we believe it's necessary to share the following data.
The PTS token price is trading ~4.5x higher than the sac price. It could be the top-performing token among the sacrifices.
The TVL of token liquidities from our treasury exceeds $2,400,000.
In the 6 months post-TGE, PTS buybacks exceeding $500,000 in current value were made. These tokens were allocated for staking rewards.
In the 7-month period, Piteas has generated approximately $720,000, surpassing the sacrifice budget, 75% of which was used for protocol developments. We currently have a significant treasury.
Since its launch, Piteas has become the second most transaction-intensive protocol on Pulsechain. Piteas has facilitated more than swaps execution, reaching a total routed volume of $1.5B on Pulsechain.
Since its launch, the protocol has been generating continuous revenue, leveraging it as token utility. Undoubtedly, the protocol's revenue has had the most significant impact on the token price of PTS Token, and this trend is expected to continue.
As y'all can see from the above statistics, Piteas has made significant investments in a short period and has received increasing user numbers and protocol revenue in return. In short, while we understand and acknowledge the prejudices in the sacrifice processes; these do not apply to Piteas.
You should know that we are trying to present a similar scenario for Pday as we did for Piteas. Hopefully, we have provided an explanatory and detailed explanation for any prejudices regarding the Pday sacrifice process.
Why didn't you set a cap for the sacrifice round, and what will you do if more sacrifices are made than needed?
This was one of the main concerns of our team. However, in the final decision, we decided to forgo setting a limit on a stage we call "sacrifice." We believe in letting the community determine the value of Pday. However, we'd like to mention that we have A/B plans in place. Here's how it works:
Sacrifice assets can never be used for personal purposes outside of protocol needs and expenses! This is one of our fundamental principles, as seen in the Piteas process, and is non-negotiable. During the complex development process of Pday, there will be significant expenses, and both these expenses and the provision of liquidity during the TGE stage and afterwards will be funded using sacrifice assets. In the event of any excess assets remaining from this planning process, there are three possibilities. The first is allocating assets for liquidity and treasury. The second is funding the development process of new products belonging to the Pday protocol. The final option is to fairly payback those who participated in the sacrifice round.
Rest assured that we uphold ethical values, and if there's an excessive amount of assets that would create more responsibility than we deserve, we won't hesitate to consult with our community and sacrificers on what to do.
Does having PLS/HEX/PLSX among the sacrificed tokens raise any concerns?
Absolutely, that's correct! Like with Piteas, we have a plan to address this issue for Pday as well. To avoid creating selling pressure on HEX and Pulsechain assets, we'll pay for all development and post-development expenses of Pday with stables/others. We'll also provide ecosystem tokens along with PDAY during the liquidity generation phase to strengthen these ecosystem assets. In summary, eliminating selling pressure for ecosystem assets and convincing the community about this is one of our priorities.
Finally, we want to emphasize that we were very eager to develop and launch Pday under Piteas. Piteas has achieved tremendous success with its current economy, but we didn't have the resources or team members to develop a second project of the same scale. We've addressed many points, reviewed our income, and had frequent meetings with our developers. The Openbook model will be a massive model containing 4 core-products in total, and we didn't have the time or resources to manage both protocols flawlessly.
Peace!
