**Updated** Possible solution for the token/ticker issue (and a very possible win-win scenario)

DAO-Wide Draft Proposal
1

New draft proposal:

Deploy new BAM contract on ethereum.
Move liquidity form BSC to ethereum, pair BAM 2.0 to ETH
Airdrop tokens to all holders on ETH
Enable staking
(Optional) Wrap BSC token (note - anyone can do this, do we want to do this as a DAO? Think this is a separate proposal/discussion)

Because the above - the contract is not renounced and the liquidity pool is unlocked, this is fairly “easy” compared to the last migration, and requires zero interaction from the token holder.

We have a developer that has already deployed a test contract successfully, so we think we are ready to move on this.

Old discussion:
Correct the contract issue (token/ticker name switch) and do the following:

  • Create a duplicate smart contract on ETH (minor differences just based on the chain)
  • Deploy 1/2 of BAM liquidity on ETH and 1/2 on BNB (we’d lose some gas fees along the way but it should be fairly nominal post merge)
  • For every 2 tokens that exist right now on BNB, there will be 1 on eth, and 1 on BNB - we would do a “flash airdrop” in a very narrow window

Still have to work out how an audit would work. We are going to contact Certik and see if they aren’t wiling to give us a hand given the fact they…really didn’t do a very good job…

Discuss…poke holes

I’ve reviewed this conceptually with Keith and a few others and it’s radically simple, just requires precise execution.

This would create an amazing opportunity however to get $BAM onto ETH quickly, and then scale down the transaction tax fairly quickly, and leave us with an ERC20 compliant token/smart contract on both ETH and BNB rather than wrapping tokens…

Net result: 50M supply on ETH, 50M supply on BNB, ERC20 compliant smart contracts on both chains…opens many doors for web 3 integrations.

6 Likes
2

Since the supply would be split, what would happen to the current wallets? Would the bnb token act as a secondary node while the eth node would be the primary node? Then this would ipen it up to cross chain between bnb and eth?

3

I’m not familiar with how this works on having two tokens on both chains so bear with me when I ask these questions.

  • By having half of the supply on Eth as well, does that mean half of the liquidity also goes to Eth network giving the investors the same amount in fiat but split now in two different networks?

  • if someone buys on Eth and the mc grows will the price on BSC side increase as well and viceversa?

  • Given that the HEX is still far from being delivered (or so I think) what are the benefits of having a token on another chain right now?

  • is the main reason for doing this now Versapay being delivered soon? (Just ask these because last time I checked they take usdc to buy loot)

  • why would I choose to buy Bamboo on Eth network instead of on BSC where gas fees are a lot lower?

  • Does this mean Bamboo wallet is ready to work as a multi chain wallet? if so, will we be able to add different RPCs just like Metamask does?

Sorry all these questions but I feel that a lot of investors might be having the same doubts.

1 Like
4

Since the supply would be split, what would happen to the current wallets? Would the bnb token act as a secondary node while the eth node would be the primary node? Then this would ipen it up to cross chain between bnb and eth?

I’m not sure by what you mean node…the liquidity would be across 2 chains. It’s effectively going to trade as 2 separate tokens that function in parallel. They would basically be equivalent. Some traders prefer eth, some BNB. They would be paired with ETH or BNB liquidity.

There really isn’t a need for cross chain in this as each would function as independent tokens/contracts as a baseline. Each would be more closely coupled with the capabilities of the chain…

We really don’t know how each chain is going to develop, as it stands today ETH is higher (but reduced) gas but also much larger development/NFTs, etc. BNB far lower gas, but I haven’t counted binance out yet on being innovative on that chain…

1 Like
5
  • By having half of the supply on Eth as well, does that mean half of the liquidity also goes to Eth network giving the investors the same amount in fiat but split now in two different networks?

Correct

  • if someone buys on Eth and the mc grows will the price on BSC side increase as well and viceversa?

Hard to say - today it seems they run fairly independently so it seems they would just be exposed to a different group of developers/traders.

  • Given that the HEX is still far from being delivered (or so I think) what are the benefits of having a token on another chain right now?

I believe it simplifies things from a HEX perspective. ETH is ETH, BNB is BNB. The code would be quite similar and reusable. It immediately activates the ability to integrate with Lootverse/VersaPay. It really depends also on what the chains do in the future…but in the present it

  • is the main reason for doing this now Versapay being delivered soon? (Just ask these because last time I checked they take usdc to buy loot)

Yes, I definitely see Lootverse/VersaPay benefiting from this. Again - running by Angry Panda and Keith it made sense to them, I want to run it by Suyash and James as well…

  • why would I choose to buy Bamboo on Eth network instead of on BSC where gas fees are a lot lower?

There’s definitely more immediate use cases on ETH than on BSC

  • Does this mean Bamboo wallet is ready to work as a multi chain wallet? if so, will we be able to add different RPCs just like Metamask does?

It would allow us to very quickly create the swap function on ETH, and likely would make it easier for other EVM chains also. From the app perspective, I want to abstract away as much complexity as possible. Crypto newbies barely know what a blockchain is…they want to buy/sell tokens and NFTs, and soon they will have access to metaverse activities. So to me, this is just a foundational thing - I really don’t think in 5 years we’ll talk about ETH vs BSC vs Solana vs Avalanche, I think things will just integrate because that’s ultimately what the consumer wants.

Nobody really knows what’s going to happen with the “chain wars” and how things will shake out…I think it’s just a good move to get onto ETH quickly but I don’t think we should discount the fact that a ton of development is still happening on BSC and will likely continue. I think this just puts us in the best position right now to be ready to adapt to what comes next.

Still some other big brains need to process this as well but I just haven’t been able to think of any down sides. I just wanted to put this out there so folks can start poking holes in it…

1 Like
6

As always thanks for the quick response.

I really don’t see the point of having bamboo o erc20 and Bamboo bep20. If versapay will profit from loot and other meta verses now and in the future (most of them being on Eth) and as you said:

Then why staying on BSC at all??? Will there be a bridge??? If You guys are going with VersaPay as a first product and that one will start making profits for Bamboo Erc20 alone then that’s where everybody is going to go.

7

How works a ‘flash airdrop’?

8

Here’s where I get confused. I still don’t understand what BAM is for. Yes you can argue that BTC has no utility an is still worth a massive amount, but BTC is an anomaly not the rule.

I’ve seen it stated before that the following are ‘utility’ for BAM:

The DAO - however I disagree that this is utility - its a solution to a problem engineered for the solution.

Holder discounts in LootVerse - Well again not a utility of the coin, more a bonus for holding it, if you even use lootverse in the first place

Maybe favorable exchange rates for holders if the HEX becomes a thing?

From what I gather BAM is not the base coin for versapay or the HEX (if that comes in the future)- is this correct? So we aren’t even in the situation that BNB or CRO are in where their tokens gain usage because people buy into them first in order to move to other tokens.

I know the project has changed massively. But at the start of PP we had a DEX on the way for which PP would be the base token and holders would earn reflections, so there were huge potential benefits to holding, at the moment I just don’t see that with BAM (and I might be completely missing something).

So at this point I’m not sure what the point of splitting an already dwindled liquidity pool and having two separate coins with (as far as I can tell at this moment in time) very little utility or benefit to the holders.

I’m not trying to fud or be negative here, just trying to get this all straight in my head.

2 Likes
9

We take a snapshop of everyone at the moment of migration. Then airdrop when we deploy the new contract.

10

Here’s where I get confused. I still don’t understand what BAM is for. Yes you can argue that BTC has no utility an is still worth a massive amount, but BTC is an anomaly not the rule.

It totally is. agree 100% - we are no bitcoin. BUT - what utility does bitcoin have??? Answer that :slight_smile: Bitcoin has no utility (store of value? limited supply? easy/cheap/safe way to send crypto? Every crypto has that utility now) other than it is the largest most secure most accepted proof of work cryptographic decentralized cryptocurrency.

We have to find utility. In general - my answer is that it lies at the center of our “ecosystem”. The DAO helps determine the utility, as do we as a corporate partner with the DAO.

I’ve seen it stated before that the following are ‘utility’ for BAM:

The DAO - however I disagree that this is utility - its a solution to a problem engineered for the solution.

The DAO is not the utility - the DAO helps determine the utility. It can help that by

  • Hiving mind decisions on direction of Bamboo decisions - the DAO is a stakeholder
  • Grass roots support/decisions on how to spend DAO resources as a community
  • ???
  • Profit

Holder discounts in LootVerse - Well again not a utility of the coin, more a bonus for holding it, if you even use lootverse in the first place

This is just the first planned utility. Discounts for VersaPay is the first planned utility. But it is a metaverse - use your imagination. I’m one of the largest plot holders in Lootverse, in one of the largest real estate/mining “groups” in Lootverse, and I work on a daily basis with the founders of Lootverse in many ways.

Maybe favorable exchange rates for holders if the HEX becomes a thing?

Yes definitely

From what I gather BAM is not the base coin for versapay or the HEX (if that comes in the future)- is this correct? So we aren’t even in the situation that BNB or CRO are in where their tokens gain usage because people buy into them first in order to move to other tokens.

It’s optional - just like BNB or CRO are optional

I know the project has changed massively. But at the start of PP we had a DEX on the way for which PP would be the base token and holders would earn reflections, so there were huge potential benefits to holding, at the moment I just don’t see that with BAM (and I might be completely missing something).

See above. HEX basically equals DEX in that equation. There will also be staking pools instead of reflection to provide liquidity that will earn tokens.

So at this point I’m not sure what the point of splitting an already dwindled liquidity pool and having two separate coins with (as far as I can tell at this moment in time) very little utility or benefit to the holders.

Read above and see if I’ve changed your mind any :slight_smile:

I’m not trying to fud or be negative here, just trying to get this all straight in my head.

It’s all good - this is dialogue :slight_smile: This isn’t fud at all. I’ve never once banned or even come after anyone asking legit questions respectfully, since day one. It’s the passive aggressive stuff that gets me salty. Keep them coming.

2 Likes
11

I like the idea except that the value of Bam can be different on the bnb and eth chain.

1 Like
12

I like the idea except that the value of Bam can be different on the bnb and eth chain.

Understood but unavoidable. The other option is a wrapped token, which we are looking at as a possibility. Or we could fully move to eth but I don’t love that idea.

Pros and cons to each. Crypto is rarely cut and dried.

1 Like
13

I think it’s important that we have the same price for both tokens, not two independently fluctuating token prices and utilities that may end up benefitting one more than the other. If we have to wrap tokens to achieve this I think we should go down the route of wrapping. As we grow to other chains, we’re going to have to wrap at that point anyway.

Alternatively, I propose we consider placing BAM on ETH and WBAM on BSC, instead of the WBAM on ETH and BAM on BSC—if we go the route of wrapping tokens. This would still allow us to have liquidity on both chains and airdrop 50% on each chain, but with the benefit of keeping one token. The benefit of placing BAM on ETH and WBAM on ERC20 chains is that all roads lead back to ETH and ETH is the greatest source of liquidity and development. WBAM would still live on BSC to allow those really low trading fees that are important to our community.

  • WBAM stands for Wrapped Bamboo
  • Bamboo wouldn’t be leaving BSC
  • Cross-chain functionality would be achieved without leaving BSC
  • Token price would match on all chains and any utility would benefit everyone
11 Likes
14

Good thoughts - this is definitely a possibility as well

1 Like
15

The thought of holding BAM long term and watching the project grow is everything about why I bought in. To do this, I worry that one token might outstrip the other and I feel it unfortunate to those who might hold the wrong token but also I don’t feel like such a situation would look good for the project. What would happen if one of the tokens utterly tanked but the project remained strong and for example the ETH token flew?
Perhaps we should just move outright to ETH or POLYGON??

16

The thought of holding BAM long term and watching the project grow is everything about why I bought in. To do this, I worry that one token might outstrip the other and I feel it unfortunate to those who might hold the wrong token but also I don’t feel like such a situation would look good for the project. What would happen if one of the tokens utterly ranked but the project remained strong and for example the ETH token flew?
Perhaps we should just move outright to ETH or POLYGON??

Understandable concern. I would think moving to ETH first (with wrapped tokens on other chains, including Polygon) would make the most sense. The biggest problem is liquidity - the DAO isn’t (yet) in a position to provide a lot of liquidity for other chains. That would require a 3rd party which brings complications.

17

I think we’re settling moving most of the liquidity to ETH with a wrapped BSC token as the best option overall. We can start thinking about a vote or 2 around opinions on it…

5 Likes
18

Pardon me if i’m asking questions that have already been answered as i have a lot of catching up to do. I just heard about the migration.

I own a fairly sizable bag of $BAM. With hopes of just leaving it be and letting the bear market pass so it can grow in time. I believe in your vision and am invested in your idea. But the frequent migrations are beginning to concern me.

So in terms of migration, how would this even work? Can you pick a ratio of allotted tokens to go into one chain or the other. Or can you split down the middle and migrate 50/50 of my current $BAM. Can i migrate all of my tokens into just the wrapped version? I get that this migration is to correct the source code that is immutable on the current BAM contract but what are the real benifits of this? From an investor’s perspective. What chain do i even invest in to hold long term if the ETH and BSC aren’t even parallel in price and growth to begin with? What happens if ETH takes off in the metaverse and the BSC remains stagnate? None of the questions are rhetorical. this is just beginning to get confusing.

19

We will lay it all out ahead of time. When this one happens it will be super simple, limited to no user interaction required.

Sorry I can’t spell it out now, we’re building the airplane while we are flying it!

I have a lot higher hopes for eth than I used to (merge went quite well), and BSC has been disappointing, but we have always had a cross-chain perspective.

You say they aren’t rhetorical questions - but I have no idea what the future will bring, I can only speculate! We follow the trends and talk to startups and see what’s happening every day…this is the most dynamic environment I’ve ever worked in. ETH does really seem to be pulling ahead, but the other day Binance released its 3 year anniversary metaverse reveal…

https://www.binance.us/en/event/3yearanniversary?utm_source=announcement&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=3ya

4 Likes
20

Adam I believe there will be multiple successful metaverses and possibly some sort of bridge connecting them some day, or they will all be successful in their own.

I watched two different almost 5 hour YouTube videos on the Dubai Future Channel about the Dubai Metaverse Assembly that took place just a few days ago. Everything on there and the different applications discussed makes me believe it will be continually adopted and in time slowly become more normalized and a bigger part of people’s daily lives.

1 Like