TLDR onboarding all high value partners is the short to medium term goal for all asset classes. This has 2 primary facets, asset issuers like Lido with wstETH and networks with incentive firepower like Arbitrum and Avalanche.

Potential Alliance Partner list:

• Lido - Done, but we want their governance token to live on Balancer in a ReCLAMM configuration. L2 Expansions also critical.
• Rocketpool - Done, but we want their governance token to live on Balancer in a ReCLAMM configuration. L2 Expansions also critical.
• Renzo - Not so interested in on chain liquidity for redemtpions. Our v2 pool is the last of their supported DEX locations. Potential to move to V3 and include REZ token in ReCLAMM but very low likelihood.
• Aave - Pending actions from Tokenlogic. Have been consistently asking them to propose for multiple GHO pools to be included, as well as the primary Aave/wstETH pool.
  • Would be great for them to incentivize a migration to a ReCLAMM in several months when we feel ready. Keep this conversation ongoing with them.
• Etherfi - Not onboarded yet and have been slow moving on adoption. They are not big into incentives, but do control most of their TVL via vaults so can direct large sums of ETH TVL from Uniswap to Balancer is we negotiate a deal well. ETHFI token is undergoing large buy backs also, this ReCLAMM for a gov token would do incredibly well fee wise.
  • It may be worth having a specific hook or permissioned routed for their buy back address to pay minimal fees on its TWAPs, just an idea.
  • Can do this type of discounted set up via the current fee controller set up whitelisting their address to control swap fees prior to a swap.
• Gnosis/Cow/Karpatkey - Have not proposed yet but seems the information is in there hands. This is an odd partner set as individually they technically do not qualify per the revenue requirements, but collectively the Gnosis umbrella does.
  • Do we want to let them make all Gnosis Chain pools alliance pools due to their existing veBAL position?
  • Do we want to separate each one, COW, GNO, SAFE, and how do we handle mainnet vs the network. Mainly are they willing to provide the incentives like required?
• Arbitrum - Their foundation is very much interested in incentivizing high value trading pairs in ReCLAMMS. Pairs like wETH/USDC and BTC which would print huge revenues. Question is are we willing to allow networks to participate in this way? It will save us significant amounts of veBAL or bribe rebates which would otherwise need to redirect.
  • I think the best way forward is to propose how much the DAO would accept to make this type of pair an Alliance pair. Mainly veBAL holders lose a portion of their revenue, but Arbitrum having a stake like this in Balancer would be incredibly valuable.
• Avalanche - Interested in a similar set up to the above. Avax/USDC is an incredibly high volume pair making it profitable for all parties. Same questions / concerns as above.
• Loose ends:
  • Stakewise may be a good participant even though their LST is less profitable. The SWISE token and their long term incentive committments have been great for us.
  • Dinero/Pyrex would also fit the same mold as Stakewise. Long term TVL alignment and bringing their mainnet liquidity for DINERO would be profitable for us.
  • Trident while they technically do not have a protocol control incredibly large sums of money. Directing incentives and TVL towards pairs like pyUSD, rlUSD, and future projects they bootstrap can be a positive sum gain for them and us if they publicly commit to give us these launches instead of Curve.
  • Alchemix, Paraswap, Stragate, Across and other long term participants. - There has been a little bit of interest from these types of teams, but spreading the word can be done if the team internally aligns on what expected outcomes are. Technically these partners do not qualify, but there seems to be a lack of understanding around the revenue requirement for old vs new pools anyway so i’d suggest proceeding however you all feel comfortable.
• Special considerations:
  • I would never allow Gyro to have Alliance pools too many hands in the pot for revenue and a mess in terms of resource management and partner alignment.
  • Can ReCLAMMs work for short tail assets or does Fernando want to forfeit those to Gyro’s new pool type? Seems a terrible strategy but the best thing for Balancer is to own all these pairs with high dollar partners. Avax and Arbitrum have deep pockets. Maybe Gyro can just play a role on mainnet and Base, but in the end I think we are subsidizing them then by not just supporting short tail pairs with ReCLAMMs.