Thank you, Austin, for bringing this proposal to the DAO. Historically, the organization has been concerned about fragmenting liquidity; however, as you pointed out, those concerns aren’t as applicable, with Base’s gas costs being significantly lower than Ethereum’s. Also, with v4 on the horizon, LPs will soon have total optionality to choose/program the fees to their desire. While the near-jerk reaction of some may be to postpone this initiative, this proposal will be a good opportunity to test how LPs will manage that flexibility with v4 in a low-risk manner.
We do have two concerns:
- When speaking about market share, we should define it as total fees generated because that is how the protocol will generate future revenue. Volume is a secondary KPI for the DAO.
- Is this a short-term problem? Once Aerodrome ceases its incentives, will the Uniswap DAO naturally reclaim the lost market share as LPs move back into higher fee pools?
One question that would be good to address before an onchain vote would be selecting the tick spacing for each of these fee tiers. Are you planning on sticking with what is typically done or trying something new? Perhaps there is merit to doing something tighter on Base because of the low gas costs.