I like the detailed description as well as the reponsive attitude.
Pricing/fee seems fair. Still, some guesstimate on opportunity cost of keeping things as they are vs. benefit of starting to utilize active liquidity management techniques would be helpful.
Anyways, 500K sounds like a reasonable amount to start with!
So when I say 5/95 or 50/50, I generally mean the dollar value, e.g. if HOPR provides an initial liquidity of $100k worth in $HOPR and $DAI, then a 5/95 would mean 95k $DAI and roughly 83.3k $HOPR, given its price at $0.06.
The reason that this inventory bootstrapping capability of our strategy is significant, is that it allows for a flexible choice of liquidity. Most projects are rich in their native token, and the base asset such as $ETH or $DAI is extremely valuable for funding project development. This is why many projects would rather choose to do a liquidity mining program to attract external liquidity, than provide the base asset themselves. Although, liquidity mining can cause negative impact on the native token, e.g. farm & dump by mercenary LPs. And this is where PALM can come to rescue. Projects donāt have to provide large amount of base asset themselves, neither do they have to do an LM. Instead, PALM will automatically accumulate the base asset by market making on Uni V3. All this is done without causing huge volatility on the project token.
There is indeed no insurance policy as we speak. Smart contract risk will never be completely eliminated no matter how many audits have been done.
Having said that, security is our utmost priority and our contracts will have been audited by both external auditors and partner protocols by the time we launch. To add another layer to it, our existing product has been battle tested for nearly a year with a bounty of over $1b for most of the time. Since it is a launch partner program we are proposing, we want to be as conservative as possible, hence the minimum deposit from HOPR is only at 100k.
Sorry for the confusion.
The fee is taken at the end of the term (1 year) or whenever HOPR decides to withdraw if before the term finishes.
Thanks! Yeah we have plans to develop certain comparison based metrics for performance monitoring.
I agree with you about the risks of smart contracts. It is impossible to guarantee 100% security - this is a myth. Please tell me how you were audited? Can you provide us with a report?
Please tell me, have you considered other networks? Our work is based on the Gnosis Chain network, it would be a great option for the Hopr community.
Ty for your detailed proposal.
Is there a list anywhere of the 80 projects currently being managed?
We will share this publicly as soon as all audit related matters are done, and no liquidity will be deployed before that 
If you are referring to liquidity management service we provide, we can do it on any network where UniV3 is present.
You can go to our dapp and have look at the vaults that are deployed
Do that, +1
I kindly support that idea
I support that idea
According to Arrakisās record, I prefer this proposal.
Will you be using Vaults V1 or V2? I found these audit results for V1.
If you will be using V2, are there plans for an independent audit? I am much more comfortable with audits done by third parties.
The fees feel a bit high to me. In this post from April, itās mentioned that the commission is 25%. While I think I may know the answer, Iām wondering what the reason is for such a sigificant increase in fees.
The proposal is for Arrakis PALM, which is a strategy thatās running on Arrakis V2, and the third party audit is being conducted as we speak. We will NOT deploy any liquidity until the audit is all complete and fine.
The fee is for PALM as well. The difference is driven by the increased operation overhead as well as a more full fledged service compared with the V1 product.
Thank you. Thatās exactly what I was looking for.
One additional question, Uniswap is not yet available on Gnosis Chain but it is in the works. Given that HOPR is a project on Gnosis Chain, would you be open to extending your services to that network as well? This would likely require another conversation when that happens.