Hey Tomo, thanks for the feedback !
This might be true at the beginning, and I guess it would stay this way if the chest is spending 100% of the fees received.
But let’s imagine that Paladin generates 320K AAVE/year (so 46.5M$ just in Aave the first year, let me dream ok ?)
In the 1st scenario, 160K Aave are sent to the treasury (which would remain neutral) and 160K are sent to the chest to be spent in Paladin ecosystem by hPal holders, so the chest would be spent in one year
However, In the 2nd scenario:
- 160k are sent to the treasury (still neutral)
- 80k are sent to the chest to be spent (decided by hPal holders)
- 80K are accumulated on the chest , which means that year two, the chest has enough voting power to submit a proposal (i think it changed with the v3 but still)
So year two, hPal holders would still have 80K Aave to spend on Paladin ecosystem, but they would also have access to the chest voting power (which would be neutral as long as no hPal holder uses it, but then it could be used to vote on any proposal decided by the hPal holders depending on their share of the chest)
So for example if someone has 100% of the locked hPal, he could submit a proposal for free without any delegation or holdings, and you’re probably thinking that he could do it also by spending Aave to borrow on Paladin, but after the vote, the 80K Aave are still here, so it’s increasing the real value of locked hPal because of the chest backing value in asset + voting / boosting power + generated fees
The treasury of the protocol would remain neutral, and the chest too if not controlled by hPal holders