Reading：https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1JSmI-YDvbdxXJ1Tud2sK8mly33zh1VmcH8i5wUgSYs0/edit?usp=sharing
TG Channel：https://t.me/SleepinRain
Binance registration, reduced fees: https://www.binance.com/join?ref=MPQ4JG9S
Paid group: 3SOL/year, interested Twitter DM
Aave has released a new RWA product Project Horizon (Build on AAVE).
In simple terms, Horizon's business is to allow off-chain institutions to collateralize RWA assets to mint $GHO or lend out USDC.
I personally think this is a good thing, firstly because this product is a new extension of Aave into the RWA track, and secondly because this product will have the opportunity to drive external institutions' interest and adoption of DeFi, and even the crypto industry.
But the community has some objections to the profit distribution: 1. Horizon may issue tokens, of which 15% of the tokens will be allocated to the Aave DAO, 10% to the treasury, 3% to incentivize the Aave ecosystem, and 2% to be airdropped to Staked Aave (stkAAVE) Holders.
The dissent of some in the community is that they believe the issuance of Horizon tokens may dilute the value of $AAVE, and that the team may focus more on the operation of Horizon.
2. Horizon profit share. Some in the community are concerned that the declining annual profit share will harm the future earnings of the Aave DAO treasury.
Personally, I think the design is quite reasonable from a rational perspective:
1. Retaining the possibility of Horizon token issuance maximizes the team's interests, and the token economics consider the feelings of $AAVE holders, directing 15% of the token value to the Aave ecosystem.
2. The year-on-year decline in Year1-Year4+ takes into account the growth rate of Horizon's business. In the early stages when revenue is low, a little more is given to the DAO, and in the later stages when revenue grows, a little less is given to the DAO, controlling the profit-sharing amount within a range.
The team hopes to find a balance between their own interests, product development, and the community. It is still in the proposal stage, and there is a lot that can be adjusted. After discussion, they will most likely find the best balance.
The product direction of Aave itself is not problematic, and the entry point is well chosen. I personally think this is a positive for Aave.
