Response – Point I: Protocol-Owned Liquidity (POL)
Regarding Point I and the implementation of bonds:
Yes, the bonding mechanism represents an additional revenue stream for the DAO.
Concretely, the integration of ApeBond via our platform would allow BIM to receive 30% of the bonding volumes generated through our interface, distributed on a monthly basis. These revenues would be received in stablecoins and sent directly to the DAO treasury address.
This creates:
A recurring non-inflationary revenue stream for the DAO
Stablecoin-based treasury growth
Reduced dependency on token emissions alone
Full transparency will be ensured. Once the integration is completed and operational, a public dashboard will display:
Total bonding volumes
DAO revenue share (30%)
Stablecoin transfers to the treasury
On-chain verification
However, it is important to clarify the process:
The technical implementation must first be completed on our platform.
A formal DAO vote on Snapshot will be presented later today to validate the integration.
Only after governance approval will the integration become official and operational.
This step-by-step approach ensures that:
The DAO retains final decision power
The integration is validated democratically
Revenue distribution mechanisms are transparent and auditable
The bonding model therefore serves two purposes:
Strengthening treasury reserves in stable assets
Creating a sustainable revenue layer independent from short-term liquidity incentives
Further structural details (caps, emission control, treasury allocation logic) can be discussed separately to ensure long-term economic discipline.
Response – Point II: Revenue Sharing Flywheel & DAO Value
Regarding the revenue-sharing “flywheel” mechanism:
To clarify, 100% of the revenues generated through ApeBond via the BIM platform are transferred directly to the DAO treasury.
There is no intermediate allocation, no private distribution, and no off-chain handling. All revenues are received in stablecoins and sent transparently to the DAO address.
From there:
Any allocation of funds (development, marketing, security, buybacks, partnerships, etc.) must go through a formal DAO proposal.
Budgets are voted on by the DAO.
No funds can be used without governance approval.
At no point are revenues diverted or privately managed. The capital belongs entirely to the DAO and, by extension, to $BIM token holders.
This means:
The Treasury grows with platform activity.
Token holders collectively control capital deployment.
Strategic decisions remain decentralized.
However, it is important to clarify one structural nuance:
The value accrual does not automatically make $BIM a revenue-distributing token. What it does is strengthen the DAO treasury, which can then decide — via governance — how that capital is used (buybacks, reinvestment, infrastructure, etc.).
So the mechanism is not:
“Revenue → automatic token yield”
It is:
“Revenue → DAO treasury → governance decision → strategic deployment”
This preserves decentralization and avoids implicit financial promises while still building long-term protocol strength.
In short:
Revenues go 100% to the DAO.
Funds are transparent and on-chain.
Allocation is governed.
Token holders retain strategic control.
That is the core of the flywheel model in the BIM context.
On the “Flywheel” Mechanism
It is important to clarify BIM’s current token structure and liquidity situation.
The total supply of BIM is already 100% minted. A significant portion is held by the DAO and is therefore not actively circulating nor fully liquid. The issue today is not token emission — it is liquidity depth and market structure.
The integration with ApeBond does not inflate supply. Instead, it enables:
The creation of sustainable liquidity
A structured buyback program funded by bonding revenues
Concretely:
70% of the revenues raised are allocated to the buyback program
These funds are used to purchase $BIM directly on the market via the BIM/cbETH pool
The first transaction has already been executed
A formal communication will follow, including:
The treasury address
A transparency dashboard
On-chain verification
This mechanism creates:
Increased market liquidity
Continuous buy pressure
Structural support for the BIM token
Strengthened treasury reserves (remaining allocation)
Additionally, BIM also includes a staking mechanism designed to increase protocol TVL. Staking plays a complementary role in the flywheel:
It incentivizes long-term holding
It reduces circulating supply pressure
It strengthens on-chain TVL metrics
It aligns users with protocol growth
The combined structure becomes:
Bonding → Stablecoin revenue → Buybacks → Liquidity growth
Staking → TVL growth → Reduced circulating pressure → Stronger market structure
This makes the model liquidity-driven and utility-backed, not inflation-driven.
4 Infrastructure Before Marketing
On the infrastructure point: this has always been a core principle of BIM.
Security is not optional — it is foundational.
Before scaling marketing efforts, BIM’s priority remains:
Strengthening the exchange infrastructure
Integrating new revenue modules (Bridge, CrossSwap, Bonding)
Expanding staking participation to grow TVL
Ensuring audit standards
Maintaining full transparency
The strategic objective is clear:
Acquire a large and diversified user base that actively uses BIM Exchange through multiple services:
Buy / Sell
Bridge
CrossSwap
Bonding
Staking
The goal is to generate multiple revenue streams that are not entirely dependent on short-term market volatility.
Crypto markets are inherently volatile. The only sustainable defense against that volatility is diversified utility-based revenue.
Security has always been a central pillar of BIM — and it will remain so before any aggressive marketing expansion.
Growth will follow infrastructure, not the reverse