Hi Lucasvo, I want to highlight a couple of advantages of Pulsar and user provided liquidity.
1 - Concentrated liquidity is far more efficient than constant product pools. A much smaller number of tokens is required to make large swaps accessible, which is why we create liquidity in the first place: to facilitate trading.
2 - Incentivizing LPs doesn’t just bring in temporary mercenaries. It creates attention for the token, gets users to do research on CFG, and creates token holders. We’re facilitating that by including links on our dex to encourage that sort of research. Generally speaking, the biggest mercenary liquidity is on stablecoin/BTC/ETH farms. For a “mercenary” to participate in LPing a CFG farm, they have to be willing to take a view on the price of CFG for at least as long as the incentives program lasts, making it somewhat less attractive.
3 - You’ve characterized this proposal as a “large” expense. CFG has a market cap of $77m. This proposal would entail ~$4,000 in dilution, an amount that will be mitigated or eclipsed by creating new token holders from among folks currently unfamiliar with Centrifuge.
4 - I’d encourage the Centrifuge DAO to vote in favor of both proposals, and then compare the performance of both strategies in facilitating CFG trading.
That’s my perspective at least, as both a representative of Stellaswap and a Centrifuge crowdloan participant.