As you have been very vocal about this, I do appreciate you taking the time to create a proper discussion around this topic. That being said, I do not agree with the means and intent of this proposal.

1. We are a DEX and should support the ethos of Decentralized Finance. The argument that some people prefer CEX and don't use DEX doesn't appease me. The DEX exists for permissionless access for individuals to DeFi. The intent from inception of the project wasn't to build a DEX to optimize token access from CEX's. I am not against CEX listings, but I am against paying for them at this moment.

2. What would be the cost to list on another top-20 exchange? If you feel strongly about the outcome of this, I would like to see some numbers on it. What would it cost and what do you approximate the return on value would be? From my perspective, this practice has a track record of being a lost cost for projects.

I feel like this proposal is focused a lot on current price action, which in my opinion, is not much of a concern at the moment. We are a young project with a lot of road to cover ahead of us. I think $$$ would be better spent on further development and content/education, which would foster more sustainable long-term growth in the future. 

Curious to hear your further thoughts, thanks.

I do not view this as an issue at current time. If there is money to be spent on a CEX listing then that signals to me that there is no better use of funds. 

As outlined in the previous funding referendum, there are plenty of quality uses of funds being worked on and diverting funds from those features seems misplaced. 

To echo the above reply, the entire idea behind building a DEX is that one doesn’t need to use a CEX in order to interact/swap. So by paying to be listed on a “top exchange” almost works against the purpose of the project in the first place. 

Also, in my opinion, listing on a CEX such as Binance would open the door for futures or derivative contracts being traded for HDX. I think that these contracts are one of the single worst means of trading in cryptocurrency as they allow affluent, highly capitalized investors to be able to hedge and/or sell their tokens (that they had access to much cheaper) in a way that profits for them while suppressing the ability for community members to profit themselves. 

I am very supportive.
Excessive pursuit of decentralization is not conducive to development. Don't think that you can despise other CEXs just because you are a DEX. CEX and DEX should be complementary.
If you care about the price of HDX, then you should let more people see it, instead of just staring at the 20 million DAI of LBP at that time.
Not every CEX is FTX, but it cannot be believed that every CEX is FTX.
In the encrypted world, no matter how good the product is, the price is worthless, and there is no need for investors to stick to it. What has happened in the past has made the community less and less, and I don't see any value in action without changing the marketing strategy if the prices stay the same.
Even if Universal Pool has 100 million locked funds and only 4,000 users, it is not necessarily better than 20 million locked funds and 4 million users.
Holders care more about the price of HDX than the design of the universal pool. Universal pool design is only one aspect. So far, all LBP participants have lost money, and the price of ETH at that time is almost the same as it is now. Teams should reflect on themselves.
One or two suggestions may wear out the patience of the community, and if it continues, failure is just around the corner.
I suggest, bybit, kucoin, mexc, gate, okex, binance, coinbase, we should all strive for these exchanges.
TOP20 is our choice.
If the team does not intend to do this, please clearly explain that everyone can get together and leave, and there is no need to work together if the goals are different.
You can be responsible for technology, but the project does not allow you to entertain yourself and do whatever you want after you get 5 million investor funds. If you get 5 million funds, you should create a value of no less than 5 million. Otherwise everything is in vain. There is no community.
The operations required by Polkadot are not friendly to general traders. Among cryptocurrency traders, there are quite a few who have not conducted any cross-chain operations. Kraken may not list HDX because it thinks HDX is valuable, maybe it is just because of HDX's crowdfunding. In fact, Kraken does not refuse to list polkadot ecological projects, so don't think that HDX should continue to insist on not listing CEX.
Actually, if it is only listed on kraken, who can guarantee that kraken is not FTX?
More CEXs and ominipools are not opposing options. In fact, if there is a better performance, CEX will instead inject funds into ominipool, which is also beneficial to the development of the project.
Really doubt the reason why the team has been refusing to pay for the list. Now that we got 5 million in funding, it's time to start marketing and make a plan.
Some exchanges, for example, only see you listed on kraken, and don't think you meet their listing conditions.
The community has discussed the listed content countless times. I hope the team will seriously open their eyes and see the world.

I want to add my voice to this discussion and thx for taking Your time to come here and start the discussion on governance forum, even if I think this proposal will not bring any benefits to Hydra as protocol nor HDX holders. 

All this discussion is focused about short term price action of HDX tokens and has nothing to do with care for long term protocol development. I do not feel like we should take any actions to satisfy speculators needs for price appreciation. The only thing we should care now is to go with planned development roadmap regarding technical and utility features for HDX and Omnipool. Only by bringing features like staking, bonds and other roadmap goals we can attract more eyes to Hydra and Omnipool in general and position as a go to Defi protocol for Polkadot ecosystem. 

But this takes time, patience, good development plan, the team that is skilled and can deliver, and funds for development. We have good development plan, skilled team and thx to that part of Hydra community who truly care about long term growth, we have funds secured for long term development plan. 

What we do not have as I see is patience within the community and understanding that short term actions focusing on price are not good for organic growth and only cause P&D schemes, nothing else. 

I truly do not understand how giving away HDX tokens on discounted prices to CEX's can positively impact the price action. And statements like this one below:

`You can be responsible for technology, but the project does not allow you to entertain yourself and do whatever you want after you get 5 million investor funds. If you get 5 million funds, you should create a value of no less than 5 million. Otherwise everything is in vain. There is no community.`

only show that people totally do not understand that development funds secured with referendum #35 does not go for Teams entertainment like hookers and cocaine, but will be used to cover development costs. And saying that protocol and team should create the minimum of 5 mil value, two weeks after the funds were secured by referendum is something hilarious. 

I hope that team will not listen to short term speculators willing to use protocol funds to pump up their bags. 

You can always sell and go chase these shitcoins that are listed everyday on all those CEX;s 



Many of my thoughts have already been covered in this discussion, but I'd like to add a few things:

- Listing on a CEX would require treasury HDX to pay for the listing (**more** selling pressure, not less - I have seen recently that Huobi charge $150K just as a listing fee) as well as HDX for MMing - which would be held by a third party. Given all of the events in the last few years I am extremely sceptical of seeing any ROI on such activities and therefore it would need to be viewed as a direct cost.

- CEX listings *can* play a role in onboarding new users, but there is a time and a place for this. We are not currently at the stage of our journey where a CEX listing would provide anything apart from a short-term pump and dump. And arguably anything short of e.g. Binance or Coinbase wouldn't move the needle.

As such I would personally not support a proposal to use treasury funds for a CEX listing.

Listing needed. At least something can start moving towards the hydra. + marketing will be from those 5kk that the yakubs took (our grandmas from lpb). Without a listing, there will be no recognition. So the yakub will sit for another 10 years and saw their hydra. having missed all the growth cycles of the market. so they will bury the hydra.

How much are these fucking CEXs willing to pay Hydra for listing?

It would be good before entering into a discussion of this level

have a concrete idea about which CEX we are talking about, what are the requirements, how much they will charge, etc.

It should be noted that at this point, it only seems to focus on the short time price, which causes the listing of a cex, since this is simply a PUMP & DUMP

I'm not totally against a listing, but is it really what we want right now?

give tokens at a discount price, empty the treasury and just have the ROI be P&D?

If we really want a cex listing, from my point of view it should be when we have some things already improved, for example, that the bridge step from eth side with better UX and some more Dotsama tokens

this is my opinion

So this proposal looks like a pump & dump one.

Someone is stuck with his bag and want to dump on new joiners during listings.
[@7KcB...QTRo](7KcBFPLfFVr5Xf6Ya6tvWEtEaHveehgVRn4SY4w5sfbfQTRo-hydradx) Does this proposal intend to fix your trading P&L ?

If i understand, there would be a linear function: more listings = better price, which is doubtful or laughable at best.

So yes, it may pump the price for a week... and then back to where it started, with less funds in the Treasury.
Then we would need to list on another CEX, to pump it again for 1 week, etc etc etc...

Moreover, even if there was a plan to add CEX listings, do you list during a Bear Market when there is no hype and people away from crypto ? Doubtful again if you really want the price to pump.

Conclusion: 100% against it

DAI from the LBP should be preserved and used to develop more features, to enhance the product, not spent for daily pump.
DAI from LBP are precious, having DAI in the Treasury is a force, and there is no hurry to spend for nothing useful for the project.

As always, make the product better & safe, then people will come and use it, then the price may reflect this.

Due to the constant depreciation of the hydra, which is associated with a lack of demand for the HDX, which creates a negative information background around the project and slows down the expansion of the community, I consider it appropriate to list on one of the TOP-20 exchanges.
This will also reduce the impact of Kraken price fluctuations on the Omnipool Hydra price. Please note that there are restrictions on trading on the Kraken for a certain part of the community.
The coin can only be bought on the Kraken and on one DEX. Some people prefer CEX and don't use DEX
This step will expand the community and make the HDX more recognizable.
I propose to start a referendum on this issue.

1. The value of a currency called hydra has been decreasing because not many people are interested in buying it.
2. This is causing problems for the project and slowing down its growth.
3. The person who wrote the post thinks it would be a good idea to list hydra on a popular exchange to help increase its value and make it more popular.
4. Currently, hydra can only be bought on one exchange and some people don't like using that exchange.
5. The writer wants to start a vote to see if other people agree with listing hydra on a new exchange.

New listing on CEX