Split proposal specifics: What trial length?

This thread is for discussing the length of trial given to Arrakis and Gamma, assuming both are awarded a trial to manage the DAO’s liquidity.

For more context, see these threads:

Discussion Phase Extension
Some Important Context

Things to consider might include:

  • Risks
  • Rewards
  • Minimum time needed to draw meaningful conclusions

This discussion is intended for people who think this time should be greater than zero. If you don’t think either project should be chosen, you’ll have the opportunity to support this preference elsewhere.

How long should the first trial phase of this liquidity management experiment run for?
  • 3 months
  • 6 months
  • 9 months
  • 12 months

0 voters


And what is the procedure after the end of this period?
Can be distributed between both on a permanent basis?
Add “Unlimited time” option.

I feel that 6 months is the minimum period to make this worthwhile for both the DAO and the providers.

1 Like

We all should be aware of the fact Arrakis will charge 1% of AUM regardless the term of the trial period.

I will confirm with Arrakis on this point. My reading of that thread was that they were answering a different question, but it wasn’t clear.


Thanks for confirming. This is an important point.

Thanks for confirming.

I asked this question directly and they answered yes they would charge for a year regardless of shorter duration.

That’s how I understood your previous reply, too. Glad this is confirmed and this does seem like a red flag to me. Is their stance reasonable is the main question? I would need more details on what kind of money we are talking about and a better understanding on if their stance is reasonable. Do we end negotiations? Do we make the test period one year to avoid the lose? Do we stick with a shorter test period and eat the lose? Will they bend on this? Worth saying, the above poll should be suspended until these details are clearly understood by the people voting.

My gut says no here. Thinking about the 1% AUM is what initially made me wonder how we were defining success. I’m curious as to whether the 50% of trade fees that the DAO would get would make up for the 1% AUM.


Yep, agreed. Maybe they will surprise us. :) If they are unwilling to work towards a compromise or give clear feedback that makes since, I would be worried.

1 Like

If we do a trial period would that cut into a 1 year term, or upon culmination of the trial period would a 1 year term engage? So, with this split are we buying into X months or 1 year + X months?

6 months )

Confirmed that this is correct. The 1% fee would be charged even if the arrangement lasted less than a year.

Sorry for the confusion: the way the forum threads replies on my device meant it wasn’t clear to me what they’re replying to.


For trial, they should do their best. I do not thing they need fee to do that :grin::grin::grin:

I think we need another option.

c) To award a trial period to Gamma, managing some portion of the HOPR DAO’s liquidity for some number of months.

To make the process simple, we could take the result of Split proposal specifics: What amount of assets? and allocate the half of it to this option.

1 Like

Agreed. Arrakis inflexibility as to fees means we can’t do the trial as we would like without paying extra for the remainder of the year (if we chose to end the relationship at the end of the trial).

I will write a quick proposal now.


6 month sounds good for me

It seems like a minimum of 6 months is required to evaluate the outputs of the process. Here, it would be appropriate for the proposers to share their previous experiences.

None of the proposals up for vote say anything about Arrakis taking the whole years worth of fees even if the trial period ends sooner. I suspect alot of people do not read every comment on every thread, so I can see people making an uninformed vote. Voters need to be aware of what they are actually voting for, including the fine print.