Summary: Deposit $3500 of liquidity into the Mt. Pelerin Liquidity pool in order to earn an extra 35% of revenue on each purchase through Mt. Pelerin On-Ramp.

Abstract: This would allow for the DAO to earn from the current 15% of all fees on purchases through Mt. Pelerin to 50%. The focus on the DAO currently increasing MAU which should ultimately drive more revenues through using features like onramps like Mt. Pelerin. We tried to get the 50% rev share without the staking of $3500 worth of MPS/USDC, but were ultimately declined but were told we could get the same boost if we deposited into the pool.

Link to the Referral Program - https://www.mtpelerin.com/invite?utm_source=mailchimp&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=referral-newsletter-en&utm_content=cta

Motivation: Currently getting the DAO to net revenue positive is the direction we trying to go month over month. I don’t see the staking requirement being lifted and maximizing the revenue we can obtain from each source will allow for us to do so and will require us to stake this amount for the foreseeable future. The longer we take to get this increased revenue share the longer the offset to the potential risk will take.

Specification - This proposal will have PTT work with the treasury to deposit the appropriate tokens and lp them into the proper Liquidity pools and ensure that this is communicated with the Mt Pelerin team. 

Benefits -  Benefits include increased revenue from the Mt. Pelerin onramp each month. Currently, the volumes on this on-ramp are lower than the others, but hopefully, with continued growth in our international customer base with the help of globalization, and our continued support of other languages, we will see this revenue growth over time.

See below for the last three months of data in terms of revenue based on a point of time for the USD value of foreign currency conversions.

LINK - https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1vVXrNO90XvSIstK9zB5EDrgkm-u1glPN/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=109763150483203399382&rtpof=true&sd=true


Drawbacks - Due to the fact it would LP’d position, it would be at risk of impermanent loss, but that can be favorable and unfavorable. In addition, there is always smart contract risk involved with any position.
Vote -
For
For with Changes (please comment below as to what changes)
Against  (please comment why you are against)