Context

The following was submitted as a proposal to the Genesis Vision team with regard to expanding the functionality of the platform and increasing adoption. It remains to be seen whether it is taken up by the wider community and the platform developers as something to be seriously considered in the future.

The original post can be found here: https://feedback.genesis.vision/communities/1/topics/796-extending-manager-functionality-incorporating-p2p-borrowing-and-lending-services-within-gv

Extending manager functionality - Incorporating P2P borrowing and lending services within GV

The introduction of the custodial multi-currency wallet plus existing incentives to hold GVT in that wallet mean that managers have a (relatively small) financial incentive to hold funds in that wallet (they can quickly switch between assets to preserve their capital without incurring withdrawal fees, and can hold GVT for fee discounts).

Looking to crypto lending services such as https://celsius.network/: To increase the incentive of holding funds in one's custodial wallet and (potentially) leverage off the platform's existing escrow service, managers perhaps could be given the ability to lend funds to borrowers (either investors or even other managers) that they would then be free to use however they like (either within the platform to invest, or externally for their own personal use), while putting the lender's wallet funds to more productive use.

Suitable additional incentives might be provided for lenders/borrowers of GVT that would increase its utility; e.g., perhaps the platform could make it cheaper for borrowers when they put up GVT as collateral, and the interest could be distributed to all platform users who have assigned their wallet funds to be available to lend. Alternatively, there are other ways such a service and incentive structure could be devised, which the community might be willing to contribute their input on if this is put forward to them as a topic for further discussion.

Without having a full understanding of how feasible this is from a technical and legal perspective, it is hard to know how reasonable such a proposal might be. But the idea on the surface appears to be well aligned with the interests of both platform managers and investors, and would drive platform adoption while keeping Genesis Vision within the sphere of financial asset management.

Currently, managers on the platform can function as 1) Traders (Programs), and 2) Fund Managers (Funds). The above proposal would add a potential third function a manager can perform: 3) Lender.

Thanks for reading.

JL

This blog is not financial advice. This is an independent blog. Please do your own research. You are responsible for your own investment decisions. The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author(s), and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of Genesis Vision or its affiliates.