HIGHER

highertbd.com // beers on me in /thegarage

sushiswap is the classic vamp attack example: they forked uniswap code, offered bonus liq mining incentives to steal users, drained billions in liq from uniswap within a few weeks

this isn't a textbook vamp because the solana actor appears to be higher-aligned and plans to offer rewards to og $higher holders, BUT
the brand and the token are two different things.

while the solana copy could grow network participants/devs, and headless/cc0 nature of higher makes it fine to experiment, it's the new token itself that is troublesome to me,

instead of building a bridge to expand crosschain (which would clearly benefit the og token), **the new token exists in a separate economic silo**, making them competitors for liquidity and market cap. now they will compete for attention, and likely create confusion and fragment resources

it could be +EV if played correctly, but given og $higher's infancy the timing feels too early

the more i think about it the more i see how this could become net positive

let solana do its thing: gamification and volume 

in a perfect world it would be the same token bridged, but i supposed this is next best as long as it doesn’t pull resources away from the og

the more i think about it the more i see how this could become net positive

let solana do its thing: gamification and volume 

in a perfect world it would be the same token bridged, but i supposed this is next best as long as it doesn’t pull resources away from the og

https://warpcast.com/highersolana/0x7b794793

chronic optimist  //

degen by night, regen by day  //

[wsw coming soon]

in what ways specifically are you thinking gamification/volume helps base higher? i’m flip flopping my perspectives lol

i don’t really think it helps the base token (apart from helping holders if they get an airdrop)

but i do think it Could help grow the brand/network

if anything they do on solana could have been done on base, it would be preferable to work on the original token (or bridge og token instead of new silo)

bottom line imo is experimentation is allowed and should be encouraged, but i do see risk of hurting the og token

i would also be on board with this fwiw, objectively as a higher holder. but from what i understand, liquidity management would be an issue. i mean, it's even an issue on base. this would be *actual* fragmentation of liq vs. the gamified burn, flywheel approach.

brykayne.com • admittedly /bogus • Product Leader • ex-SuperRare • ex-Peloton • bry.base.eth

my (1-time) experience moving some supply of a token from Solana to Base resulted in $100k loss in minutes due to an arb bot. 

there are ways around this, if you've got a proper market maker in place, like wintermute. 

a fantastic product idea is a self service arb bot that gives fees back to token creator/holder