UNI token just got utility for the first time in its existence. This is THE EVENT people in DeFi have been waiting for years now.>Nobody talking about it
>>61300625There is a thread about it open. I dont like that they want to take from LP providers. We can just switch protocols.
>>61300625>gay branding, all hot air
There was literally two threads on it yesterday stupid retard
>>61300643??Are you new to DeFi? The fee switch has been talked about for multiple years now and it has always been about LPs eventually taking a cut, not adding more tax onto the traders. This hasn't changed.Most other/smaller protocols already do this and those that don't yet are planning to follow.This allows for the protocol to survive long term.
>>61300625UNI token was not and never will be needed, this is just rent seeking so that Uniswap Labs can dump UNI on bagholders
>>61300711Shut up retarded loser
>>61300756Explain to me why it's needed for LPs or the users swapping on the pools? Or why it is needed for a L2 which works just fine without it?
>>61300801There are lots of things the token can be used for, but I won’t speculate on that. It is currently being used for governance of the largest dex in the world as well as, if the proposal passes, earning sustainable yield through fee generation
>>61300832Immutable decentralized exchanges don't need a governance, and the sustainable yield is nothing more than rent seeking off the liquidity providers who have put their capital at risk to earn a real yield.
>>61300837If trades are cheaper then volume will increase and LP makes more money. Let’s not even talk about what a real yield generating token could do for IL mitigation for LPs.
>>61300867If everything that they proposed goes through, trades won't become cheaper (since the total fee rate is the same, just now a portion of that fee rate is going to buy and burn UNI instead of all of it going to LP), with the exception of the MEV auction thing that he wrote about. In that case, you could see larger amounts of volume from arbitrage flow since the highest bidder won't have to pay the protocol fee and will get a better quote.Also the idea of stealing revenue from LPs and then giving them a token as "incentives" is asinine. IL should be mitigated by delta neutral hedging, not by continually inflating your token to infinity in an attempt to bribe your LPs.
>>61300832That and $10 will get you a coffee. We care about $$$ not imaginary votes>>61300867People won’t trade because it’s cheaper. That’s like saying you will drive to work more often if the price of gas comes down. If you’re trading thousands a couple hundred dollars doesn’t matter
>>61300705>The fee switch has been talked about for multiple years now and it has always been about LPs eventually taking a cutWell lets see i can switch if there will be a better one. I dont like the proposed 16%, 8% would be ok but uni holders are greedy.
>>61300931Well if they give me the token instead im fine with it.
without doing any math whatsoever, uni holders probably end up with like 1% aprits always been extremely overvalued
>>61300643Where did you read that? I can’t any specifics on what he wants to do. A whole lot of jargon and no plans except moving unisocks to v4
High Calorie Human checking in. Will I qualify or do I need to trim down a bit?
will sushiswap do the same thing?
It’s Over
>>61307311#15646165 exit liquidity event of the yearhttps://x.com/bubblemaps/status/1988221631563788699
>>61303640The other thread had that with source. No matter from whom it's taken it makes the protocol less efficient.
>>61300625I keep checking uni tho, I might buy a dip.
>>61300931>Also the idea of stealing revenue from LPs and then giving them a token as "incentives" is asinine. IL should be mitigated by delta neutral hedging, not by continually inflating your token to infinity in an attempt to bribe your LPs.Sorry for ai answer but grok says:No, liquidity providers (LPs) in the UNIfication proposal are not directly compensated with UNI tokens or any other token airdrops/incentives. The proposal explicitly diverts a portion of trading fees from LPs to the protocol (for UNI buybacks and burns), resulting in a net reduction to LP yields—e.g., a ~16.7% cut for V2 pools (from 0.3% to 0.25% LP fee) and 16.7–25% for V3 pools depending on the tier. This has raised concerns about liquidity migration to competitors with higher LP fees.
>>61308007Under $8 is a pretty sure fire 2x. I bought about 300 UNI today. Though I did sell 1000 at $9.50 so I have some money to play with on this one.
>>61308510Pretty quick swings for Crypto. You usually want 50% gain with these trades.
>>61308662I settled for a measley 40 percent gain in a week with my Uni trade
>>61307336>no pink tokens >no pink pussyMust be hard being such a poor stinky faggot.
>>61308763Well token increase with swinging i mean. If you sell at 10 you need to buy at 6.6 to get that increase for example.
>>61300625test
>>61309519You’re not wrong. I see no reason this doesn’t go to 10+ at least briefly in the near future so I feel like buying 30 percent of my sold stack at 8 isn’t the worst idea. I’ve been sidelined watching uni pump before.
>>61309699Checked. Uni has big potential if the clown market ever corrects itself. No reason Uni isn’t in the top ten when all this bullshit like cardano dies.
>>61308868I sold at $8.5 bitchass nigga>>61309699>>61310547"we just need to cool off for the next rally""my investments are with great companies"
I hold 13,250 UNI tokens. Am I gonna make it???
>>61310778I think ygmi
>>61310547Uni literally mogs cardanus
>>61300625If it was a stock it'd be trading at 80 times earnings so only a little higher than NVIDIA. Guys I need you to stop being retarded for a little bit. Stop buying sexy stuff buy oil and healthcare
>>61311264>if it was a stockStopped reading there
>>61300625https://x.com/haydenzadams/status/1988846923080421878
>>61313476shitty PR, expected reaction of a nu-maleimagine investing in this
>>61313501He mogs you and steals your girl
>>61313501based
