Future of CHESS ~ How can it be better?

200k BNB deposited into Tranchess as we speak

1 Like

And we’re approaching the 1B again. :wink:

It’s nice to brag about TVL, but 16K BTC + 39K ETH are sleeping earning 0% interest. Those could be using Venus or whatever lending protocol to give Alpha to Queen and Rook holders like BNB does.

Nobody is spliting their queen into rook and bishop, no matter how the boosting works, people rather just keep in queen and be able to recombine at any time. People just deposit asset to earn free CHESS without playing the game.

Why? Because the ‘Swap’ is not a swap, it’s an order-book, with 5% average spread and 5k USD combined volume on good days, most pairs are at 0 daily volume…

So why would people leverage their crypto-assets, if they cannot reliably trade rook or bishop? If nobody splits tokens, and BTCx2 or ETHx2 have 0 volume, then what is the point of CHESS at all?

I’ve written about this in this forum before. I agree 100% with the OP. Let’s hope that a better swap system solves this problem. Otherwise, as the OP said… what is the point of CHESS at all?

I am not sure depositing the BTC and ETH in the protocol to Venus would bring in extra yield. The yields for these tokens are already very low and adding 10K+ tokens to Venus would lower them even further.

Hello Tranchess,

I’m happy to see the V2 update introducing instant swaps and high liquidity for ROOK and BISHOP as I suggested in my previous post in febuary. There is one thing that troubles me however, it’s how it uses PancakeSwap for trades (BTCB/BUSD, ETH/BUSD, BNB/BUSD).

I’m aware that pancakeswap has high liquidities and makes things simpler, however it’s a big loss of value for CHESS holders. We could really easily have our own trading Pairs, either QUEEN/BISHOP, or preferably ROOK/BISHOP.

I know it sounds like more work that isn’t necessary, but please hear me out. Let’s take BNB for example, which currently sits at 176M$ liquidity on pancake, for 370M$ volume over 7 days. At 0.07% fees going to Pancake treasury, that is about 259K weekly profit for pancake swap.

Considering we have been able to raise millions of dollars of liquidity on bishop/busd (despite harshest market conditions), and there’s dozens of millions using the normal staking, I estimate the lower bound of the liquidity we would be able to have on all bishop/rook or bishop/queen pairs to about 5M$. If we assume that volume is strongly correlated (>0.9) with liquidity, which is the case for decentralized exchanges, thanks to arb bots, it would give us around 10M$ swap volume, and around 10K$ extra weekly dividends for CHESS holders (if fee scheme is similar to PancakeSwap).

If we drop the normal staking incentive (which is actually useless, does not create any value whatsoever), and give it to people who take risk and LP the new ROOK/BISHOP pairs, we would have even more liquidity and fees to CHESS holders.

Of course, this would only get better as CHESS price grows, people would get an increasing incentive to add liquidity, generating even more volume, and fees, etc, creating a snowball effect.

TL;DR: We should compete with PancakeSwap for swap volume. Stop using PancakeSwap for XXX/BUSD trades, we create a ROOK/BISHOP pair for the three tokens and use it for the ROOK trading. We should remove the valueless queen/rook/bishop staking, and instead incentivize people who provide liq for ROOK/BISHOP. Premium/discount opportunities, arbitrage bots, will create volume and fees for CHESS holders.

1 Like