Laser focus of MakerDAO efforts to get from 6B to 100B and 1Trillion!

I was looking at:

and thinking that Maker/MakerDAO given limited available resources is really going to need a laser like focus to getting from 6B not just to 10B but 100B and then to 1T.

I don’t want to slight any community or ideas but I really think a new discussion about how to focus resources towards achieving the new set of growth goals is relevant so the DAO can send a message about where we are going, and how we plan to do it. Save people from making a MIP6 proposal that may not longer fit our criteria for even considering due to time and cost constraints and diverting resources from achieving a new set of goals.

I expect this to be a longer term discussion but I really would like us in this discussion to focus our energies on ideas to bring the next 1B DAI vaults and the vision for how we get to 100B and 1T. Do we see 1000 1B vaults or like we have now 1 400B vault, another 200B and the rest below that. If so what is the 400B and 200B vaults composed etc.

I honestly think trying to even get from 6-10B via 1-10M DAI vaults is a huge and massively daunting task that will not scale to 100B much less 1T.

I think Institutional Vaults are a way, RWA is another, crypto is going to lag here unless the total MC of crypto approaches more like 10-100T which I don’t see happening by itself unlikely source to get to 1T DAI.

My biggest issue here is how to focus limited resources for the greatest gains so the whole MakerDAO can get a laser like focus on the goal at hand and how we plan to achieve it.

Ideas, comments?

BTW; I guess now I can be called the 1T DAI MakerMan and at 6B seems like the next logical target to put in our sights.


I think there are two components here: 1) Set protocol metrics on what we’d prefer to see in the way of onboarded collateral (plenty of discussion per the community call today) and 2) Target the big buckets of money and go after them…hoping some of them are low hanging fruit. If not, prioritize complexity and then tackle it. Going after these buckets also requires a bit of CU collaboration in the supply and demand areas. I know this is at the meta-level and an oversimplification but we need to think about the “block and tackle” work in the business of the protocol. It’s so important.

When we say NO to something, we’re actually saying YES to building a much better protocol. Yup, it can be hard to say NO sometimes.


Yes, to be honest, unless there are liquid wrapped versions of major tokens, most of high quality crypto collaterals have been onboarded already.