10% makes sense to me - perhaps with a statement that the rate will be reviewed annually (or 6 monthly or whatever).
Questions: What sort of impact will this change have on EDSI apr? Am I correct in assuming that it would decrease APR by around 3 - 3.5%. (from 20% currently to 16.5-17%) would this bring forward the flippening, where APR starts to increase each week. Maybe even a bigger hit in the short run would be enticing if it put the flippening in sight?
Another thought, maybe the return for eds-vote and eds-d needs to be reviewed. Paying 50% of income makes it a hard sell. Perhaps a move to 75% would attract more funds. a 25% profit on 20K HBD for example is better than 50% profit on 2K. Just something else to consider.
Just a few random thoughts, LBI will be happy with whatever you decide and continue to support EDS.
Yep, the EDSI APY would decline to around 17%. It will speed up the flipping but only by a little. After throwing a few numbers in the spreadsheet and factoring in we'll be getting 100 HIVE less a week from eds-vote powerdowns soon, it looks like the decline would be 0.04% a week. Not really much closer to the flipping to be honest, it will speed the process up but it really depends on how much income will can produce. If there is nothing we can delegate to, we're stuck with HP curation.
Had thought about upping the returns for EDSD but not so much for eds-vote. When I set them up, the eddie-earner account had around 120k HP. So i allocated 180k EDSI tokens thinking if eds-vote and EDSD got 2 hive for each EDSI minted, that would be 360k HIVE powered up to eddie-earner ensuring that the account would have at least 500k by the time all EDSI were minted.
I'd be reluctant to see this. The purpose of eds-vote was two-fold - another way to distribute EDSI and to gradually pay off the deficit that was always there and covered by compensation from @spinvest. If we increase the reward structure, we'd be robbing Paul (paying off the existing deficit) to pay Peter (75% rewards), before we even start to look at what's happening with the drop in curation.
I'd also be reluctant because many of the accounts delegating to eds-vote are not interested in either saving, EDSI or the long-term stability and well-being of the fund. They're delegating for a vote. I haven't checked but I'm guessing they're selling their EDSI ... and their HIVE, which is an even bigger problem. I'm loathe to get into self-voting by proxy - here's a good post about it - and I wouldn't want to incentivise that behaviour by increasing rewards. In reality, the rewards are still there, in the fund, and adding value to every EDSI held.