Sovryn Whitelabel on Other Chains?

BZX was just hacked again losing $50m in funds. This is possibly the 5’th hack of the protocol. BZX remains one of, if not the leading margin trading dapp on Polygon, BSC and Ethereum. Currently has a TVL of approx $250m.

A thought occurs to me: what if we could whitelabel Sovryn margin trading and lending on other chains. Would this be desirable? It likely would be a distraction, so I am loath to suggest it. However, the Sovryn mages have built a secure and highly functional platform. Would this be valuable on other chains? Is there any desire to share this? What would the implications be on brand? If this were to be done, would it be under a different brand? Like Polygon Margin? Or Avalanche Leverage?


1 Like

Why bother building on these other chains instead of using the resources that would be spent building on another chain to instead attract that TVL to Sovryn on RSK? Advertising, liquidity mining, easy button for migration of liquidity, etc etc.

BTW I would consider this a distraction, imo we have enough work on our hands getting the platform on RSK in order, getting perps working, etc, to even consider trying to maintain the platform on more chains, especially chains that aren’t well-aligned with bitcoin.


I agree with @light here. Improving the services here on Sovryn, making it user friendly for noobs to get started, is better than offering our services on other chains.


As a new user to sovryn I find it easy to navigate . Put aside some " jargon" changes to what happens when claiming reward.
So as @light & @karabela have mentioned building on your already good platform is a better allocation of limited resources. With “taproot” only 10 days away, I am sure those human resources will have their hands full building as to exploit what should be an exciting expansion of the BTC blockchain

1 Like

It’s easy to find arguments for both sides. If Sovryn becomes really popular someone will fork it for another chain anyway, but if Sovryn already made presence on a certain chain at least there’s chance that revenue could be connected to the same system. If this should be done I believe it’s important to at least keep a connection to the name and bridge the revenue to the core system on RSK.

That said somebody will fork it anyway, and the only way to stay in front is to be better and faster, which argues for keeping the resources fully focusing on one chain. But this is also alot up to the development of the RSK chain itself, will if continue to be competitive, if not there may be a point where ideas like these becomes much more important.

1 Like

For me this is a hard no. I already find it extremely difficult to digest the current splintering of the brand with the Origin launch. Further diluting the brand in anyway is absolutely not wanted here.
I mean it would be all fine and dandy if the current brand would be totally rock solid we are onboarding thousands of new user each day, the project is soring and in use. I am not seeing any of this.
I think ALL focus needs to be on making the current iteration of the APP absolutely awesome. That means better more professional interface, Limit and Stoploss (rollbacks I guess for that) and a rock solid communication team. The last one is the weakest part currently and makes the brand super weak.
Fix all this and the users will flock from other chains no need to go to them. There was talk on some AMA that infrastructure is already overtaxed (so we can´t have rollbacks currently) - this would further thin infrastructure.
Make the F* app great. Focus everything on it. Forget all the other shit until that is done. Currently Sovryn looks like a child with ADHD - lots of great ideas but the core most important one completely lacking focus. If that is done if brand is super solid then go off tangents - but going to other chain - with the core mantra being “DEFI for Bitcoin” I do not think will ever be a good idea. Get people to Bitcoin(L2) - focus on that.