@friedger’s coverage math is the killer detail in this thread. We’re 40% above the price where STX-only stackers get zero yield and the reserve starts draining. That’s not a tail risk. That’s a one-third drawdown away from new bonds halted and the system running stressed.
I want to add what’s upstream of that.
The whole thing depends on BTC capital showing up at scale to make the capacity-asset story work. We’re not seeing the cohort that would be accumulating STX in anticipation. If BTC holders were positioning for paired bonds, you’d see it in price. You don’t.
Dual stacking is the closest test we have. 20% sBTC collateral didn’t pull capital at scale. The bet now is that 4x cheaper collateral plus L1 self-custody unlocks what 20% bridged couldn’t. Maybe. But that’s a specific claim about a specific cohort, and the market isn’t validating it.
Combine that with @friedger’s coverage math. If the cohort doesn’t show up, we’re running at parameters that put STX-only near the cliff while we’re still in bootstrap. Existing holders are absorbing the risk during exactly the window when their price support is what makes the whole mechanism function.
What’s the basis for expecting BTC participation beyond the curated bootstrap? Dual stacking didn’t pull it. Current price action isn’t signaling it. The SIP assumes it materializes but doesn’t show why this time is different.
And +1 to @friedger on the SIP-031 unlocks not being in the sell-pressure model, and to @axopoa on the boost coming from the Endowment instead of consensus emissions. Both points stand on their own.