Thanks for the thoughtful proposal @scp
The intuition is sound: if OIS rewards were paid in something other than PYTH, it would reduce sell pressure on the token. And the idea of “real yield” is compelling — it’s a narrative that resonates with stakers across DeFi.
That said, I have a couple of concerns worth raising.
- Tradeoff with PYTH Strategic Reserve
The DAO recently passed OP-PIP-87 (https://forum.pyth.network/t/passed-op-pip-87-pyth-token-phase-2-pyth-strategic-reserve/2293), which allocates 1/3 of DAO treasury to purchase PYTH tokens monthly. If we redirect USDC to OIS rewards instead, that’s less going into purchases — meaning the DAO would be slowing the growth of its Pyth treasury. One of the DAO goal is to increase its treasury and here we’d be trading a mechanism that accumulates PYTH in the treasury for one that distributes value outward.
- Legal structure constraint
This is the harder issue. Pyth DAO LLC is registered as a non-profit DAO LLC in the Marshall Islands. Under Marshall Islands law, non-profit DAO LLCs cannot distribute their earnings to members. Paying stablecoins to OIS stakers could be interpreted as exactly that — a profit distribution to token holders.
This isn’t just regulatory uncertainty (as @grizzlyland noted); it may be structurally incompatible with the DAO’s nature.