Kujira: 2.0 and their own Blockchain

Okay, I have no idea what I'm doing here, but let's do this @TeamKujira-thing.

I fund @TeamKujira from $USDC that I borrowed from @BenqiFinance. So: the first thing I have to do is to go to @CurveFinance to translate $USDC to $axlUSDC, because ... [stupid-#$$??] reasons? (???)

And you shared the BLUE bridge from @TeamKujira, not Axelar's bridge? Is @TeamKujira bridge on Blue owned by Axelar?

Okay, then we bridge those sweet, sweet $axlUSDC over to Kujira blockchain, ... and get charged 1.5 $axlUSDC for the privilege of doing so.

Imagine getting charged $1.50 to pay a bill with a credit card. For every single transactions.

That's what a 1.5 $axlUSDC fee is, folks.

When I bridge assets between other blockchains –Harmony, Terra, Avalanche – I pay almost exactly nothing to bridge blockchains. Why is there such a ridiculously high fee for bridging assets onto Kujira or Cosmos or wherever?

More people should be asking this question. Many more.

Okay. So now I have liquidity on Kujira blockchain: this is a self-loan, so I record this debt against myself in my ledger

Can you say SPREADSHEETS?!?!?

What do I do with liquidity? I want $USK to bid on liquidations, there are two ways to get to $USK. Let's examine both.

One approach is the straight-up market trade on @TeamKujira FIN ... you could place a limit order, but from stable coin to stable coin? Why? So I'm going for the market order here. 

Now, I can see my trade in FIN's order book, but when I go to @TeamKujira FINDER, I DO see my $USK, but I DO NOT see the transaction that got me the $USK.

That's ... unsettling.

The other way to get $USK is to mint it. To mint $USK, you need $ATOM, not $axlUSDC.

How do we get $ATOM?

A couple of ways: on FIN or on Osmosis.

Which has the better swap?

Osmosis. By a lot. 

But here's a rub.

@TeamKujira bridge doesn't bridge $axlUSDC to Osmosis, even though Osmosis allows the $axlUSDC -> $ATOM Swap.

But it DOES allow $ATOM to be bridged TO Osmosis, but NOT BACK to Kujira, and it does allow $KUJI to be bridged TO Osmosis, but who cares?

Really??

Now, it COULD be $ATOM COULD be bridged from Osmosis to Kujira. Is that option disallowed for me because I don't have $ATOM on Osmosis?

I'm not going bridge assets and swap them without hard assurances that I can get them back.

There's no such assurance from @TeamKujira on BLUE

This restrictiveness on what assets can be bridged across blockchains ('$axlUSDC'? REALLY?) and what CAN'T be bridged on the Cosmos interchains is really off-putting. I thought Kujira was supposed to be 'any Cosmos assets, anywhere' but if their own bridge disallows this, then...

FIN is supposed to be so superior to LPs?

It's not. I get a better swap on Osmosis axlUSDC -> ATOM than on FIN.

If your product is a superior technology, then give me the better swap, AND do NOT restrict the open, permissionless, fair markets as your bridge does here.

Please.

So, I swap $axlUSDC for $ATOM on FIN, because, apparently, it's just too d-mn hard to get to $ATOM any other way on nor off the Kujira blockchain.

We now have $ATOM, let's go mint $USK on BLUE.

Looks familiar to @anchor_protocol.

it most definitely IS NOT Anchor.

You provide collateral, yes.

You get $USK, minted, as a loan to you.

So YOU are charged interest.

Where's my incentive to mint $USK, when I'm CHARGED for it?

So, let me get this straight.

I'm FUNDING @TeamKujira's stable, so it's a BACKED-stable, unlike the algorithmic $UST.

I get it: we avoid a spiral-depeg.

But I am HELPING YOU to fund YOUR stable, and you're CHARGING ME to put up funding for your stable?

That sounds backwards.

By funding $USK, I'm an investor in your protocol.

As an INVESTOR, I make money. I'm VESTING my funds. What is the return on my investment?

Arbitrage, liquidation fulfillments, these are opportunities $USK ownership gives, but as an INVESTOR MINTING $USK, you need to pay me.-

This is concerning to me. @TeamKujira is getting investment because people are trying out this new thing that looks 'kinda' like @anchor_protocol, but I hope they incentivize us to mint $USK. Otherwise, I think $USK will lose minting-support when people see the swap is cost-free.

Next, serious, problem with minting $USK?

I put in $143 worth of $ATOM, 10 $ATOM, and the liquidation occurs at 60%?

That means if I don't want to get liquidated,

... and I don't want to get liquidated,

I go for the 'DANGEROUS' loan of 75%, not of the collateral, but of 60%.

Practically stated.

I bridged over 150 $USDC, that got eaten down to $143 worth of $ATOM because of bridging and unfavorable swaps on FIN.

But that's not the half of it. Because 64 $USK ISN'T EVEN HALF of $143 of the $ATOM collateral.

64 $USK minted from $143 of $ATOM

FAIR???

Oh, and remember, friends: YOU are charged interest for minting $USK (that is: funding $USK) for the protocol.

Okay, so now I have $USK. Let's place a liquidation fulfillment bid on ORCA! 

You see there are liquidations occurring, so I may be able to pay back my minted $USK ... 'loan' (?) ... by de-minting $USK ... to free up my $ATOM collateral, that I get from liquidations?

Optics. 🙄

You see in this thread that I have concerns about how all this operates and how this can be sustainable.

I pray these are the first few baby steps. I hope @TeamKujira and the community move forward to a protocol and blockchain that does match operability to the current hype.