As long as we give investors the ability to reinvest WING with a Good APY, pair investing with a Wing as well, I think we will start to see the value of WING increasing, following COMP footsteps is also a great idea.
But we should tackle issue by issue, and supply is a huge concern!
Posted by Erick Pinos this Morning
Hi everyone,
Here is the supply information we are trying to get CoinGecko and CMC to correct.
We have two DAO Escrow Accounts for the Community Fund.
AUKZ3KL1FRRhgcijH6DBdBtswUdtmqL8Wo (1.75m)
AbTBwzjveRe4fcWKWeKKpbDQTKVRajfTFh (.25m)
The second address was escrowing funds for the promotional campaign distribution that didnāt happen because the target wasnāt reached. We are moving the funds back into AUKZ for simplicity, although both are technically ālockedā.
The API https://flashapi.wing.finance/supply/api/v1/wing/circulating-supply currently includes the .25m in escrow address AbTB. Once it is re-locked, the API should return a more accurate 371,173 WING.
The max supply is 10,000,000. But only 2,371,173 WING has been minted thus far, and more is being minted every block as mining rewards.
Thus, on CoinGecko it should say
Available Supply - 2,371,173 (API+Escrow)
DAO Escrow Account - 2,000,000 (AUKZ+AbTB)
Circulating Supply - 371,173 (API)
Max Supply - 10,000,000 (hard-coded limit)
And on CMC it should say
Circulating Supply - 371,173 WING (API)
Total Supply - 10,000,000 WING (hard-coded limit)
Based on the current farmed tokens and community members various suggestions we should push for a proposal as following:
2M Supply pretty enough! Thus we can catch long term investors like MKR. Wing have more potential than other tokens.
Best Regards
SL
I totally agree but it may not be enough
Question is when we reduce max supply, do we reduce the rate at which Wing will be distributed or do we reduce the 10 year timeframe?
Whatever is decided in the end for supply, rate should also be adjusted at the same time. Iām in favor for x0.25 redux. And that should be applied throughout the rate timeline.
Need to figure out-
If 3m / 5m, which pool is it getting burned from?
There is currently 2.3m WING in existence. 2m locked in community funds, .3m minted from mining rewards.
Are you saying to burn the 2m community funds and the rest from the mining rewards? Or to burn entirely from the mining rewards pool.
If burning from the mining rewards pool - The WING is being mined every block, and thereās no way to stop the WING from being minted, and I donāt know if itās possible to intercept it from being distributed to lenders/borrowers/insurers. Thatās why we were doing the buy back.
I still think it best not to touch the community fund. Any adjustments should be focused on the mining rewards pool.
Based on what @Mr.Jamesbond shared of your post, @erickpinos, i see a key phrase you used that helps me get better now with what you wrote here. āHard-coded limitā. I was assuming the remaining 8M figure could just be altered to fit a lower value. Since that seems to not be the case, I have to admit that thereās definitely more thatās needed to be thought thru on this. It may just come down to us getting more creative with new ways to use Wing, tbh. Simple, not simple. I have a few ideas off my hip, but feel i should leave it there for now until I can have more time to process and speak further. Iāll be reexamining the white paper for sure 
I did respond to your post earlier today, btw, @ Reintroduce WING as collateral and WING APY for WING
5M is a good point to start. We could try voting and see what people think.
If the community fund 2M also has to burn 50%, then it will make more sense.
Everything needs to be at least halved, I will support the following formula.
1 Million community fund + 2 Millions minted
or
2 Million Community fund + 3 Millions minted
We should have a vote as following:
And the team has to find a way to reduce that supply.
Hard coded doesnāt mean it canāt be altered or irreversible, Code maintenance/Hard fork can be used to alter any hard coded software is an option to reduce the minting process. and I think the team should think about it before a vote.
Promoting user case of Wing and Supply adjustment plan:
Use wing as collateral and lending currency
Promote the reinvestment of Wing with a reasonable APY
Possibility to lend in pairs with at least 1% of Wing to be offered:
Adjustable ratio example (WING/pUSD / 2% Wing/98% pUSD)
Circulation adjustment
Option 1:
Reducing the max supply to 3.000.000 Wing
1M in community Fund and 2M mining rewards
Burning 1M community fund straight away and hard fork mining reward to a max of 2M
Option 2:
Reducing the max supply to 5.000.000 Wing
2M in community Fund and 3M Mining Rewards
Hard fork mining reward to a max of 3M
If you cut down total supply to 5 mil , then community fund must be cut by half to 1 million as well. Otherwise this is not fair adjustment.
A ratio adjustment is fair I think Good Point.
Ratio adjustment will immediately change the WING APY. Money will leave the pool. Thatās not helpful to increase the TVL and itāll harm the community.
If Ratio and Max-Supply adjustment levels up wing price and make the uptrend on wing value we may see a rush in pool by investors though, imagine 2k dist rate per day while wing holds value above $30 or more. But again, doing so without any marketing plan or dev-updates or addon features wonāt help much in long-term. As @erickpinos always refers to C.O.M.P model, I see around ~4M max supply
at $2.3k daily distribution ( Look here ). Iām not saying we must go exactly the same path as they did, But that 10M is obviously a big number.
As @Mr.Jamesbond proposed, 3 options are fair to go
1- 3M Max Supply
2- 5M Max Supply
3- 10M Max supply
If 3rd option is chosen or voting didnāt pass! things will remain untouched.
Ratio adjustment must be fair otherwise it will give wrong impression to investors like scam . The reason of cutting the maximum supply by half is to stop devaluating asset by half on the long run. On the other hand this will also stop community funds devaluating by %50. Mathematically we can not simply push the community funds X4 while we decrease the supply x2.
Wing is having hard time guys, speed up your move on this please. We surely need reduction of Max-Supply to a reasonable number to lower daily distribution rate. And beside, we must start marketing by unlocking 3k wing ASAP.
@erickpinos , I saw your comment on Telegram channel regarding the Technical possibility of Max-Supply adjustment on Ontology! Will you share if there are any updates? How this proposal can be qualified for next WIP?
As since the start the Project was marketed on Binance Launchpool Info Page, Coingecko & CMC had a max supply of 2MM, the project should reduce the total supply to 2MM to set things straight. I am not sure about how this is possible technically but this should be done at the earliest.