$AVAAI is held by gravity strongly
and it also pull me in lose and the $ENA and $PEOPLE got people's attentions and want to leave #Binance ......
By the way.....#TermMax
The real test for a lending protocol isn't what happens when markets are calm.
It's what happens when liquidity disappears.
In normal conditions, collateral can be sold, buyers are available, and liquidations can happen through the market.
But stressed markets are different.
Prices can move quickly. Liquidity can thin out. Some assets may not have enough buyers to support a clean liquidation.
That's where TermMax's physical delivery mechanism becomes interesting.
If a loan remains unpaid or only partially liquidated after the liquidation window, TMX can use a different settlement path instead of assuming the collateral can always be sold immediately.
The redemption pool can contain both the underlying asset and the collateral. FT holders can then receive a proportional share of that pool.
The important idea isn't that liquidation risk disappears.
It doesn't.
The idea is that the protocol has another way to handle collateral when normal market exits become difficult.
That matters especially for assets that don't trade with the depth of major crypto assets, including certain real-world or less-liquid assets.
To me, this is a bigger design question than liquidation alone:
What should a lending protocol do when the market cannot provide an easy exit?
TermMax's answer is to make the settlement path more flexible.
That's the kind of infrastructure detail that becomes much more important when markets stop behaving normally.
@TermMax
#TermMax
and it also pull me in lose and the $ENA and $PEOPLE got people's attentions and want to leave #Binance ......
By the way.....#TermMax
The real test for a lending protocol isn't what happens when markets are calm.
It's what happens when liquidity disappears.
In normal conditions, collateral can be sold, buyers are available, and liquidations can happen through the market.
But stressed markets are different.
Prices can move quickly. Liquidity can thin out. Some assets may not have enough buyers to support a clean liquidation.
That's where TermMax's physical delivery mechanism becomes interesting.
If a loan remains unpaid or only partially liquidated after the liquidation window, TMX can use a different settlement path instead of assuming the collateral can always be sold immediately.
The redemption pool can contain both the underlying asset and the collateral. FT holders can then receive a proportional share of that pool.
The important idea isn't that liquidation risk disappears.
It doesn't.
The idea is that the protocol has another way to handle collateral when normal market exits become difficult.
That matters especially for assets that don't trade with the depth of major crypto assets, including certain real-world or less-liquid assets.
To me, this is a bigger design question than liquidation alone:
What should a lending protocol do when the market cannot provide an easy exit?
TermMax's answer is to make the settlement path more flexible.
That's the kind of infrastructure detail that becomes much more important when markets stop behaving normally.
@TermMax
#TermMax
