Governance_and_Risk_Ep_195_(getmp3.pro) Fri, 6/17 4:13PM 54:21 SUMMARY KEYWORDS maker, dai, revenues, price, market, dao, eath, collateral, mips, core, posted, polls, week, d3, signal, vote, budget, next slide, rates, proposal SPEAKERS ElPro, Prose11, MakerMan, Artem Gordon, Nadia Alvarez, Primoz Kordez Prose11 00:03 All right. Hello, everyone and welcome. This is 190/5 governance and risk call here Maker DAO. My name is Payton. I'm one of the governance facilitators and go by pros 11 online. And I'm joined here by a bunch of awesome people who participate in the Maker ecosystem are generally interested in our data and how it works. This is our weekly call where we go over governance and risk aspects. So the protocol, give you an overview over what's going on and let people hop on the mic, ask questions, participate in the shaping and indirection over the organization. So go over a ground rule or two here, before we get started. Well, as you've probably noticed, this meeting is being recorded. So hello, if you're watching on YouTube, let's try not to talk over one another. So it will be a bad experience both presently and for everyone watching afterwards, there are a couple of facilitation tools you can use, that'll make my job a little easier in terms of hosting this meeting. If you would like to add something, after the person who's speaking is done, you can always make use of the raise hand function, you'll find that under reactions and zoom. If you're unable or otherwise unwilling to up on the mic, you can always drop your calm in our chat. I won't be reading through those periodically and bringing them up when conversationally appropriate. But yeah, this is an open meeting. So we do really encourage you to take part ask questions. Give your opinion on things. But let's do it in a respectful manner. And be mindful that there are a lot of people who might want to share their opinion as well. That's about all I can think of. Thomas, you got to go there. Next slide. The agenda today we'll start as usual with the governance roundup going over votes or Maker import proposals and what's happening on the forum. We then have one initiative update today that will be the May financials. And our discussion will be around the IBD. Three in response. Some of you around probably noticed we had an urgent executive yesterday for a change. So we'll be going over what that was, how that happened, and then discussing the the risks associated with it. All right, let's hop into the government Toronto. So polls, you're gonna notice there's a lot up for open right now on the Maker portal. Don't take it to the next slide. Thanks, Thomas. We had three included weekly polls all which passed this week. First being deploy a trial permissionless open market operation that is using DSS Killam. For those familiar, basically looking to kind of buy back Maker from the market. We have a management of the Velodrome, AirDrop and V and ft. Basically improving Oh, it's an all requests set up for management and collection of fees. And then we have adding rocket as a new ball type. All those past, they will have some various lag links in terms of the implementation that we expect. Within the next 30 P days, you should be seeing those coming out for an executive vote. We'll cover the ratification polls in the MIB segment. But a final reminder that there are two ongoing Greenlight votes voting ends on Monday. So be sure to check those out if you haven't given your opinion. Cool. So if you're a savvy, governance user, you might have noticed two ongoing polls, I left out where the prioritization polls will be giving a full forum post as well as kind of a more in depth dive on how those are looking. But to give you a brief rundown on the technical resource side of compound Aetherium, being like overwhelming first choice, clatter onboarding as well being in people's top three, in addition to being one larger holders first choice Maker teleport, that's our LT work is in the top five of all voters with over 1k MKR voting and notably on the governance and most voters ranked only a few options. So on the voting end, you were instructed to basically rank all the options you want to see considered for prioritization. So their voters aren't following that instruction, or there's actually very few items they want to see the Koreans putting their focus to. So that's good feedback, if you are one of those voters, and you didn't mean to send that signal and maybe consider resubmitting your vote. But if you did, we're certainly noticing that take us to the next slide Tom skins. Excellent. We have the collateral class sentiment poll. That's the other ongoing on. As I mentioned, collateral onboarding was, you know, kind of the second or the third option depending on how you want to look at the vote breakdown. So it is cool that we have these kind of nested polls so we can say Alright, well MKR older seem to want some collateral onboarding to be a focus while what do they want cycle our onboarding to be? We're seeing overwhelming support for core crypto collateral, though, a large, large delegate as well as a few scholars have putt pegs really solutions as their top choice, broader market demand based solutions. These are kind of like d3 items, also showing a lot of support around top holders. One interesting finding from this poll is that reward assets options. So both the arranger and just general are kind of largely missing from a lot of the top folders, top five choices. So we only have about 2.1k MKR. Collectively, with reward option, we were on assets in their top five. Again, we're seeing fewer options ranked. Granted, this poll has a few less options than the other. But again, kind of getting a signal at least from from voters that they want to see a tighter prioritization. Like said look for a form of data later today. We'll actually have some data and some visualizations to give you there. But wanted to give a brief rundown during the vote segment on this call. only other thing to note on votes is executive proposals. Yesterday we had the urgent executive for unwinding gavi d3 M, said we'll be talking about that more later. And next Wednesday's executive, it's going to be a pretty small one, just to Core Unit MKR transfers to take care of Alright, that'll do it for my votes rundown I will pass it over to civic says join today's MIPS. 06:23 Thanks, Payton. Hi, everyone, civics here this week with the MIPS update. So if you don't mind, let's get started. We'll begin with the ratification poll. So let's start and see how the votes are going this week. We have the two top level MIPS MIPS 74, which introduces permissions less open market operations. The leading option for this one is nope, and the MIPS 75, which introduces Task Force's whose aim is to coordinate high level business decisions on behalf of Maker DAO. There's also been the first task force onboarding some proposal MIPS 75 C three SB one for the growth Task Force, which of course cannot be ratified unless the MIPS 75 Different MIPS is ratified to at the moment, the no option is leading with 75 and the linin. Sorry, and the leading option for the onboarding of the growth Task Force is reject. We have a two Core Unit budget one for growth Core Unit and one first Strategic Finance Core Unit. I believe we've already talked in detail about this last week, so I'm going to go straight to break downs. In both cases, the business as usual option is leading that is the existing budget and not the increased alternatives. Remember, both of these budgets have a one year duration. We also have two facilitator onboarding for existing Core Unit one for cycle not for the Unified Security Core Unit, which has a large amount of MKR in the abstain option and one for today or for the data inside Core Unit, which is going with the yes at the moment. The proposal set for onboarding the SES incubated lending oversight Core Unit led by Luca pro currently leading with no as the option. And last but not least, we have there. Sorry, can you show the next slide please? Thank you. We have the Maker Shire spatial Special Purpose fund with no escalating option with just over 2k MKR. The amendment for MIPS 16 is going with 100% Yes, and the budget amendment for the keeper keeper network is also going with 100% rate of approval. That's it for ratification polls, they will run for 11 more days until Monday 2027. Now let's do a quick refresh to the proposals in RFC which are essentially the same as last week I believe. We have the top level MIPS MIPS 72 which authorizes 60s capital as real world as it ranger for Maker DAO, something you may have missed an addendum to this map has been posted by the author of 72 and I'll be sharing the link with you guys so you can check it out. I hope I can because this is actually really really slow right now. Sorry, guys. Um, there you go, if you want to check it out. Next, we have an the GovAlpha facilitator onboarding. As you all probably know, Patrick J is aiming to become a GovAlpha facilitator, with LongForWisdom. Having stepped down from the role GovAlpha currently has only one facilitator. And finally, we have two amendments. One that amends the Core Unit of boarding process. There has been no year made episode for it. So in case you want to go check it out. And we have the MC four c two sp 21, which amends MIPS zero to 18 to introduce the notion of retrospection dates for MIPS. And that's about it. Thanks for having me. Sorry, my busy super slow right now. Prose11 10:24 Yeah, I didn't notice and I appreciate it. So awesome. That will take us to forum updates, and I see are ready to give us an update on that? Yep. Artem Gordon 10:37 Just posting the link really quick. All right. Well, happy support bounce Thursday to everyone. And welcome to the forum recap, we're going over top news announcements and discussions happening for the week of June 9 to June 15. And we'll begin with announcements. And first up, the weekly decentralized voter committees will now be taking place at 7pm UTC and yesterday's call is now recorded and up on YouTube for anyone who wants to check it out. And tomorrow rune will present part four of his game plan focused on metadata and the call will also be recorded and then later up on YouTube. So keep an eye out and I'll also post it in the discord chat. Next up, we have GovAlpha outlining why the growth Task Force map was removed and replaced due to an error. In short, the proposal was posted as a standard ratification poll instead of a rank choice Irv format, and the new vote will end at the original time being Monday, June 27, at 1600 UTC, and GovAlpha will be updating how they review the new MIPS to avoid similar issues in the future. Next up, we have SES who has developed a custom tool to improve Core Unit budget transparency. And the tool is intended to make it easy for Core Unit for Core Unit and facilitators to ensure that API supplies and all kinds of financial data is transparent and the whole organization and for the rest of the community. They also posted a video walkthrough of using the tool which is helpful and pretty exciting. And their next goal is now to build a more user friendly API for the dashboard. And moving on to our discussions. So we have had a about a dozen or more discussions on the forum this past week, and of which a handful have informal polls. And so due to limited time, I'll just go over the P A informal poll discussions to help improve their visibility. And first up we have recognized elegant one bug who outlines the current state of MIT proposal timelines right now and submits a poll asking the community for opinions on adjusting these parameters. He argues that the seven week period is a bit too long and inefficient, and instead suggests for shorter, potentially more efficient timeline through an informal poll. It's June, like the month Okay. Well, now I know thank you guys. All right. Well, next up we have balloonist and I hope I got that one right. But he's part of the incubation program aiming to ramp up legal resiliency Core Unit. And he asks, really like why do we vote by a show of hands rather than using a ballot? He discusses both the pros and cons of both of those using ballot and show of hands and ask the community which of the two do we 13:41 prefer. Artem Gordon 13:45 And next up, we have prankster of new silver submitting by asking the community to allow real world finance to spend some time and resources to engage with new silver, and they signaled a request for raising the debt ceiling for new Silver's vault to 100 250 million Dai will be submitted after the post. This post offers details on the items that new silver and real world finance would engage in and asks whether real world finance should allocate time and resources for do Gelatt due diligence and legal for new Silver's upcoming debt ceiling signal request. And next up we have G dip who posted an informal poll asking whether Maker should fix the price of steak eath to one eath to help crypto traders avoid liquidation. And next up, we have signal requests, and there were two but one is overrated. So this there's no active signal on request right now. But GovAlpha has submitted an urgent signal request asking whether the Ave d3 bar being the target borrower rate should be set to zero. This signal request was posted on June 14. and was up for 24 hours, successfully ending on June 15, and resulting COVID to go on chain as an expedited executive vote, which has also successfully passed and will be executed tomorrow on June 17, at 2100 UTC. Now the successful passing of the signal request overrides another signal request by el progreso to set the Ave D three M's up ceiling to zero. But besides this, there are no other similar requests currently being active. And that's it. There's definitely a lot more stuff in the forum at a glance, check it out. And as a three point summary, some more discussions Help Wanted and ongoing initiatives. Awesome, Prose11 15:44 appreciate it. Artem are always some juulsen and formatted glance, city, make sure you're checking that out on the forum. All right, that should bring us to our initiative updates. And I believe we just have one and that is the financials could take a guess, but I'm really sure it's someone from Strategic Finance, who's going to be up and on the link. Is that Is that right? Yep, that's right. 16:10 Do the financials this month? Are you sure A P Do the financials this month? Are you sure Prose11 16:14 I could, I could take a stab but I think it'd be much more valuable. If you graduate. 16:20 If you say so. can do 16:32 them when the numbers go up maybe as long as the numbers are going down, I'll be in charge of talking through them. And so 16:48 just to walk through the financials, Please familiarize yourself with this legal disclaimer regarding the contents of the following presentation. And on the next slide. So, in this executive summary, hopefully we're we're summarizing some of the key changes for the month of May. The net story is that the results continue their compression amid the broader market turmoil tied to the new neterra debacle of May. And this month, you can expect more of the same with cell system three AC creating even more turbulence. monthly recurring revenue is down to 4.3 million Dai, about 10% down year on year. So about 50 million down next 12 month basis on the back of strong declines in the price of eath and WPC collateral, monthly recurring income is down to 1 million Dai so down 78% year on year. And just for context and references approved operating expense budgets are about 50 million Dai but based on actual reported spend, on a mix of cash and accrual, the operating expense items are about 32 million. But in short, the overall lending business continues to be driven by the availability of collateral debt from which is tied to the price of beef and the price of BTC. And to the price of eath. And for the price of BTC. In other words, Maker is basically a leverage multiplier protocol. So when things go up Maker goes up very fast. And when things go down Maker goes down very fast. Maker strength and resilience is in being able to manage these transitions in a smooth way. But its downside is obviously that the operating expenses are based in a different currency than the rent than most of the revenues in the sense that the Dai generated this type of the price was very volatile. So but the net of it is that with about 100 million Dai in our surplus buffer at the moment, the runway for Maker is sufficiently long to weather a number of years. We will however, propose at the end of this presentation, a structured framework for extending that runway further and help rationalize operating expenses, adjust operating budgets, new market realities, and improve the resilience of the protocol. So in the next the next slide, here, you have an overview of the monthly results. So top to bottom on the page, we're working through a net interest income of 4.3 million, and net liquidation income of 4.2 million, which bring the overall protocol revenue to 8 million Dai. So this liquidation income is obviously very lumpy and very choppy and highly dependent on overall market conditions. Workforce expenses of about 3 million Dai with the caveat that this is on chain data, so may contain multiple months of built up expenses in one single transaction. So one month or maybe higher, another month, maybe lower in February, for example, in recent memory, we had a relatively low cash burn month, P but this is usually because the expenses for February would have been preloaded. We track actual expenses separately, working hand in hand with the core units to understand what the what the quote unquote accrual basis spenders. And incredibly, we are still sustaining 71% Return on equity, which is quite shocking. So next slide. In this reconciliation, what we're hoping to do is help people understand what the drivers are for the change in recurring net protocol income from one point in time to another. So on the left hand side of waterfalls, you see at the top, on the top of the screen, the ending balance, that's April 2022, recurring net protocol income and the end of the three months ending Jan 2022, at the bottom, if you walk through each of the different steps, we try to isolate the the different drivers. So the main drivers every single time almost every single time are changing the collateral, the changing the price, changing the yield. And the same thing for W BTC. Particularly quarter on quarter, you can see a marked effect of what the impact of the decline in price is done to the overall lending business. So in order to drive higher revenues and higher profits Maker basically needs to add more collateralized and using quarter and quarter optimizations on Oracle gas costs. And, you know, including a lower eath price actually drove $1.4 million in improvements from Oracle utilization. So we can think both the price of eath and the Oracles team for their work and reducing this expense. So on the next 21:27 slide, we're showing what the monthly income statement is, by breaking out the different revenue items, lumping in all of the Core Unit expenses into one line, one line at the bottom. And here you should be able to see the impact of the liquidity and come in moments of high market turbulence, as well as the relative amount of net interest income in relation to prior months. So on the next slide, focusing on the lending business, obviously the core of Maker, there's essentially an ongoing slowdown in DeFi lending markets, that's putting pressure on gross gross interest revenues. So on lending income of 4.3 million died down 31% from last month, we see the distinction between the collateral types. And here we see that EF and BTC are still driving the vast majority of our lending income, the return on assets is holding up reasonably well given the environment, but still under quite a lot of pressure, particularly when you look at it from a year ago perspective. So here, I think the the, the key element to draw from is just our dependence on these two crypto assets and therefore, again, to their underlying price. On the next slide. So you may notice a theme with this month's results. But it does actually turn out that our revenues are very high, highly correlated to the price of the underlying assets. And what we're trying to do here is show an overview of the historical results of Maker over a longer time horizon and try and trace the the performance of those revenues in relation to the price. In the full may financials, we have an additional slide which is quite interesting to compare with, which shows the amount of collateral that's locked in the system, as well as the revenues that are generated from it. And what we find is that there's a reasonably large and consistent amount of eath and W BTC. Collateral that's locked in. But ultimately, the amount of revenue growth that Maker can capture beyond the fluctuation in price are tied to the number of collateral types that we can attract and introduce at scale. And then on this there's a side note that Maker rightly prides itself on conservatism. But it is in fact as you can see from these charts, they leverage multiplier protocol anchored on the overall crypto market. So here I'm going to hand over to Mark who will take us through to the end. 24:02 Thank you, Adrian. The slides are on chain eath lending market share slide and measures eath lending the lending market measured eath it started to stabilize with eath deposits increased by about 200k In May, verse last month, and the most of these deposits are likely to protect existing existing positions and not borrow new debt. It is encouraging to see rather than eath continue to be withdrawn and mass as we've kind of seen since November eath market share held steady at 43% in May flat from April on a year over year basis. Market share decreased by 3%. With Ave being the primary beneficiary of a recently ended their liquidity mining program will be quite interesting to see if there's any significant impact on market share. Compound continues to provide as competitions to depositors and lenders so If there's any indication of that liquidity management are actually being effective, we should see it in the data in the next few months. Next slide please. The onchange W BTC. lending market declined by about 2% from last month and was up 27% versus prior year, makers market share increase by 3% versus last month with about 2000 More dBc deposited in the Maker protocol compared to April or W BTC. Deposits increased by 74% from from last year, and our market share is flats from last year, despite that big growth. Next slide, please. So, for those who attended the decentralized voter committee meeting yesterday, one of the subjects that came up is that's actually actionable in the near term is carrying out a budget reduction. We spoke briefly on this subject on rinse column one, it provides additional context and a framework for how we're thinking the DAO should approach this. Step one in this process would be returning excess funds that have been drawn from the surplus buffer back back to the surplus buffer in the DAO. We have I mentioned this on the QSR. But we have 16 million and Dai Core Unit wallets right now. And the burn rates about $2.65 million Dai a month. The next step is determining what we want to achieve with the budget reductions. And we can either shoot for profitability as seems to desire, we can target a breakeven or we can set a fixed or moving cap based on our recurring revenue. In all these have pros and cons, and different impacts on our long term valuation profitability. And once we decide what our goal is, there's a few different options. You know, Option A is a broad base cut across the Dow with no layoffs kind of everyone kind of takes their piece of the pie they're cut. This would be probably around a 10% cost reduction. Option B is a more broad base deeper cut, targeting around 20% reduction in the burn rate, and could involve layoffs. Number three, this is, in my view, the best option was more complex, difficult to implement is a targeted budget reduction based on individualized Korean performance budget reviews executed by the delegates. This is more akin to what is performed in traditional corporate finance and many companies. And really, this allows us to take the first step as a DAO it's more more reasonable capital allocations and targeted capital allocations decisions rather than looking back at historical capital allocations and thinking they're still appropriate in the current market environment. So the timing for this, we can start posting signal requests to see what the DAO, what direction the Dallas to take this, and kind of how we're thinking about it. You know, we've been tracking operating expenses. You know, some coordinates report, financials and operating expenses using the SES format. Others use their own different formats. But we basically leverage that data, hold meetings, the delegates, Maker holders have basically dictate how the budget cuts are made, and how the capital is allocated. We also welcome ideas from the community. And we have a bunch of other ideas on top of this to reduce the cash burn to extend our runway. Yeah, that's, that's it for the presentation to see. Nadia has her hand up so far away. Nadia Alvarez 29:03 Yeah. So actually, I was thinking about all the initiatives that Ruth has on mind. One of these initiatives are like, reducing budgets. And I think it's something that that we have to think altogether about how to do it on the best possible way. So I really like this initiative, Dennis, and David are running about how to improve the way how we handle communications and our N calls. So I, I would like to have like something similar like maybe a small group, where people from different career rates and community delegates on whoever who wants to collaborate, can think about the different ways to solve this challenge or how to manage it. I think that going straight to the forum with signal request, I'm just asking for opinions like, for based on their past experience. It's it's complicated, like a lot of drama, a lot of people pointing fingers, a lot of conversations on the forum that probably are not productive. But if we have these small group of people thinking about proposing solutions different with different perspectives, maybe that that could work. And I think we should all do that. Not just for the reducing headcount or cutting budgets initiative, but also for the other ones that that Rooney is proposing. I think we all agree on room's ideas, I think so maybe I will add another initiatives that are not on his plan. But that's my personal opinion. But at least I think we all kind of agree that we are on a bear market, and we have to be more efficient with our budget. So probably a small group, thinking about the solutions may work. Prose11 31:17 Appreciate it. Now you see Maker man with his hand up. So a couple MakerMan 31:22 a thanks, Payton. So I just noted in chat, one of the things I've been trying to talk about is the numbers here, it looks like our real cash expenses to revenues, are basically still we're still net positive here, right? So if you think that basically, our net expenses are something more like 30 million a year, if we have cash revenues of even 20 million, we're sitting on 80 million and the surplus, so you kind of have seven to eight years worth of Ruin, provided that doesn't decay. And so I really want to put this whole thing, I'm the one that stood up on budgets quite some time ago, right. I was just concerned that the assets were growing too fast relative to the revenue declines I was seeing right. Now we have real numbers. We can look at this more carefully. And should before we get all dramatic about what are we going to do? How are we going to cut, we just need to think about what we think our revenues are going to look like we got some good revenue streams potentially coming online. And basically, our cash expenditures aren't that high, it's just see us are holding on to a whole bunch of cash. So I really would like to look at this more carefully, and not get dramatic about doing a head twist change, when in reality, we can really just smooth out the run here and not do anything dramatic. Prose11 32:43 Thanks for sharing your thoughts and Maker in seeing further conversations going in chat and welcome anyone if they want to hop on the mic and talk about them. 32:51 Yeah, just to confirm what Maker man said we are, you know about breakeven on a cash basis, assuming the you know, a lot of these self reported Korean expenses are accurate. I know it's a little difficult to see on chain because a lot of core units are requesting three months plus the P M P runway and their initial draw from the surplus buffer, which kind of have the skates the true cash burn of the protocol. So on that basis, you know, we're about breakeven, losing about a million a year at the current recurring stability fee rate, which is not a terrible situation to be in considering the carnage in the markets. Thank you. You know, we definitely, you know, should tighten the budgets a little bit, but we're not in a dire situation. By any stretch of the imagination, you know, certainly there's risk if the markets continue to deteriorate further. But we should still have plenty of runway, assuming even if, you know stability income goes down to the single digits and millions revenue. So yeah, I think the DAO is quite well positioned especially relative to other projects in this space. Prose11 34:23 Seen some good discussion, but do you want to be mindful of our time as well? My call for last thoughts on this topic? Awesome, we can always continue the conversation in the forums. That's a nice place where it is. That's longevity. On the people here listening to this call recording Well, basically benefit from the information we're sharing now. All right, excellent. I'm not seeing any other hands raise or questions in the chat. So I think we'll go ahead and move on. Now to get into our discussion segment, yes. All right. So today we're gonna be talking a little bit about our Ave d3 M response. Some of you are probably aware of the signal. But follow the preceded an urgent executive, the past one yesterday, could be muscle street dumping. So I'm actually going to pass the mic over to promote she's going to talk a little bit about what d3 M risk was kind of why he recommended the origin signal take place. And we'll start off discussion now. Primoz Kordez 35:49 Yeah, so I can, I can provide a bit of background, what would be next steps on our site. So two days ago, we posted urgent proposal to disable our DTM. And there were three things that made us decide on this. The first, the first thing that happened and everybody's aware of is that Celsius, became under stress earlier this week. And once we started digging into our this loan book, specifically into Dai market, which DTM is exposed to, we realize that sales is actually the biggest borrower of Dai, which means we are, you know, apart from our exposure to Celsius it Maker, we're exposed to them on the Dai market on the Ethereum Dai market on on our The second thing that made us a bit anxious is, of course that they hold a lot of steak dates, they're far the biggest stated supplier to our with about 400,008 supplied, but they borrow stable coins, which is different than the other, the usual users who mostly supplies take the ID and borrow it. In Celsius case, the situation is actually worse, because it's not only about staked in the bag in conflict with the liquidity of it, but they are short, stable coin, which means you know, they're also exposed to it price, which is in the market right now. So all of this made us a bit anxious, let's say, but we, we weren't particularly convinced we want to push, push, you know, this this proposal through. But then the third thing happened that actually made us decide on this. And this was the proposal on governance forums, by gauntlet. And they proposed to change three parameters, which kind of makes sense if you look from the perspective that they were mostly mitigating the risk of those positions for long stick deeds and short it. But if you apply this to seltzers case, it was it was way too risky for us. There were three, three changes, and one of them was pretty much crucial. And you know, where we just saw, this is way too risky. They propose to increase the liquidation threshold to 90%. In our terms, this means that you would decrease liquidation ratio for stake did 210%. And this was P P this was just, you know, let's say, this was the risky, you have Celsius who's under stress. They're mostly collateralizing, their stable coin that with staked it, which is totally liquid, and you have 110% liquidation ratio. So this was where the we made the decision to temporarily, I'm going to repeat again, temporarily disable the tree. And there's the other part of the story, by default, this doesn't create any problems for us or for our, in this case, the exposure of the time was 50 million. We were earning basically 1.4% a py on this, which is quite low. So we didn't see like, we're gonna impact our revenues a lot with this, although that's definitely not in our domain. It's not how we, you know, just not the main trigger behind the decision. But definitely something we also looked at. And the second one was, you know, if we do this, do we impose any additional stress to other markets? And we didn't, because the exposure was still pretty low. We didn't really affect the rates there. After we, after the vote passed yesterday. 50 million was withdrawn instantly. And today, it's increased by 30 basis points, I think So not a huge difference. We were also able to test the mom contract the instant unwinding, which is great for 12, as expected. So that's it. Next steps. We have monthly rates meeting, end the month, every month and the month. And in about two weeks a bit earlier, we're going to reassess the situation on our end and propose any further changes. What we'll be looking at is three things. First, the situation with Celsius, but now also with three hours capital, because we saw, you know, there's a huge contagion risk right now. And wells, wells, wells just keep on failing, it seems. But who knows who's next. And so we'll be looking at this, I'm pretty optimistic about this one. Currently, it seems they are protecting their positions, they unwind that both of them yesterday, not sufficiently, you can see they are still struggling with liquidity because it too small tops basically are the payments. But situation is improving. The second thing we're watching is, of course, staked it liquidity and staked it recursive positions, which are also improving. That's also good to know. And the third most important thing, of course, we'll be looking at the governance proposals. This proposal that went online, I think, yesterday or was the day before, is currently not passing. So that's good news, but it's still still live. So it can in theory still pass. Because this proposal won't be live at any moment or a similar one. And if there's a different one, we're going to evaluate it. So this would be the next steps. And I'll probably stop here for now. Prose11 42:01 Awesome, appreciate their rundown permission. So I guess a couple things to highlight there from it, obviously, the changes have already been enacted. That's because the moms set up for the B Ethereum doesn't need to wait for our GSM delay, which is usually our 40 hour pause on on any regular executive actions. This is like one of the safety measures of the protocol, one of the things that we can do to quickly responder is so cool to see that in effect is as you mentioned, another thing worth highlighting is that the Open Market Committee will be looking into these rates in a couple of weeks. Obviously, the regular governance processes are available to everyone, right anyone could write it's like well to kind of undo what we just did with that executive vote if they think the risk has passed. But like the team has basically committed to looking into the issue and posting what they talked about for the Maker Open Market Committee parameter proposal group words they're the group of people that tend to look at our rates and basically periodic changes for for our of all types. The only thing I really wanted to add is on the governance and like this was kind of cool to see it all happen so quickly and effectively. Right we had an urgent signal process so we had 24 hours over 70 voters from the forum on that signal then put up an exec and had it executed pretty much instantly you know within a couple of hours which was really great. Wanted to post the emergency response map here so you can see basically what the rules we have set up in place for when something is is urgent or out of cycle kind of the important takeaway from there was this could have been P an emergency Right? Which would have been one level higher. But talking to the other mandate actors everyone was okay with it being an urgent request which is why we had that daily time before the exec went up. That's more than flattering for me I secretly your hand up, I'd take it away 44:20 I just wanted to rattle the cage once more on the on a topic. In addition to all the reasons we've been discussing for her this response, the Oracle situation there is not something that we should ignore. It was mentioned in the initial risk assessment of Ave but the fact of the matter is that of a does rely entirely on channeling price feeds with no double check, no sanity check, no circuit breaker, and channelings price fees are secured by 409 multisig. So there's a lot of risk that comes along with that that I don't looking back I looked over the discussions, I don't feel like it was properly vetted. You know, so I think we should take that into consideration when we're thinking about bringing the Avi d3, back. The compound de Ethereum, on the other hand, compound does have a sanity check, they check against uniswap V two, I believe prices for other markets. And if there's too much of a deviation from chainlink, they hit a pause and emergency pause. So they're already accounting for that. I just want us to keep that in mind when we think about bringing it back to have a d3 m&m, kind of capitalizing on this safety situation and just bring some awareness to it. Prose11 45:41 Thanks, Chris. Appreciate that perspective. And, yeah, as you mentioned, what's, uh, one of the things mentioned in the risk assessment, but risk assessments are long and we don't always, you know, talk about every part of it. So people do have questions about the Oracles feel free to voice them. ElPro 46:07 A follow up question for promotion. might have missed. Maybe he spoke about it got a phone call? Sorry. Any truth to boy not any truth. But are you guys monitoring? Three hours capital? heard through the grapevine there's possibly a liquidation at 993. I'm not sure if that's true. Regardless, I just wonder if you guys were monitoring. And then the second part of my question is, when do you get up most as, you know, head of risk facilitator? When do you think you tell the OMC team that you believe it's safe to turn it back on? The the three or four have a two part question there, brother? Primoz Kordez 46:50 Yeah, so we are monitoring, of course, the traders capital account, I monitored it the whole morning was yesterday, I can't even follow this now. And they literally were not like the the chain link price feed, I think it makes like, couple of dollars, otherwise they would get liquidated. It was really insane how close they were. A