@bailsecurity Yup, went through the same situation as in the infographic & can confirm Bailsec found way more issues.
You guys deserve more recognition.
I might die on this hill saying that this was the only decent path forward, even though it’s been a very difficult choice. We poured our time, our old company’s treasury, our own money into this, and yeah, it stings that it didn’t land the way we hoped.
I originally stepped in as a cofounder of https://t.co/Xpefw2u8eJ to build the liquidity hub for Converge. We designed a novel type of DEX that leverages yield-bearing assets to bootstrap on-chain markets more efficiently. Unfortunately, the chain didn’t launch, and we ended up navigating the situation while entrenched in a long points program, trying to convince ourselves that a last-minute chain switch was totally fine because “the design is still good.” Classic self-psyop.
But let’s be real: 99% of projects in this space fade into irrelevance within a few weeks. I honestly thought we had a shot at the 1% that actually matter. But the more we pivoted, the more it felt like we were drifting away from building something durable. Not just something that “works” at TGE because the TVL is decent, but something that deserves to exist. Eventually, the only responsible decision was not to launch at all.
Deposits remain fully redeemable 1:1, and pre-depositors will also receive Ethena points, sUSDe yield, and Etherfi points.
What’s next?
Only priority is making sure everyone is made whole and taking a breath. Beyond that? Honestly, I don’t know yet. And that’s okay.
I apologize again and thank you for the support, it's a tough lesson.
It’s with a heavy heart that we announce we won’t be launching Terminal.
Why we made this decision
Terminal was originally designed to be @convergeonchain liquidity hub. We completed the full codebase and were ready for a Q1 2025 launch. However, the Converge chain never went live as expected, and a launch doesn’t appear to be planned for the near future. This left us with deposits and a fully built protocol, but without the ecosystem it was designed for.
We explored multiple pivots but none were compelling enough. Each option came with material blockers: limited support, low asset-onboarding potential, weak long-term perspective among others.
Ultimately, we were not convinced that any of these paths would lead to a successful long-term project. Launching a project just to launch a project goes against our principles. Preserving integrity is paramount.
To Roots holders
All principal is preserved, and all user deposits remain backed 1:1.
Participants are able to withdraw their deposits 1:1.
Each current Pendle position is entitled to the Ethena Sats earned, the sUSDe yield associated with it, as well as etherfi points.
A tough call
To our supporters, LPs, ambassadors— we’re sorry. This is a difficult decision, and we know it’s painful for everyone. We are all losing something today. But we believe this is the most honest and responsible path forward.
We will open-source the fully audited protocol codebase. Terminal was designed as a MetaDEX with a novel mechanism to address yield-derived impermanent-loss and reinject yield to bribe markets, improving the model economics by default.
Thank you for being with us on this journey.
I do not have control over those funds, and in my opinion, the only appropriate course of action is for the yield to be returned to Roots holders. I have no intention of benefiting from the funds in that wallet.
While I am not able to comment on the current status, the foundation should have a fiduciary obligation in this matter.
What yield are we keeping here? The skimmed yield won’t go to team members. Are we done bs-ing here?
We started the pre-deposit program because we were told the chain would go live and we were on its testnet, as simple as that.
I know it’s disappointing, especially as YT holders, but we’re suffering from this as well and are working on solutions as of now.
Why do people feel the need to comment on things they only have surface-level knowledge of?
Deploying an AMM is no casual lift and comes with serious dependencies.
We could have exit-sold our way out of this recklessly, yet we chose to realize a massive loss. Food for thought, my man.
I get the frustration, but again, we're not winning anything here.
It doesn’t come out of nowhere. We wouldn’t take a massive loss like this if we believed the project was sound enough.
But there are far more dependencies and risks to consider than someone external to the project might realize.
Launching with decent odds of long-term viability is a tough call. These pivots along with other factors I can’t comment on publicly, ultimately led us to cancel the launch.
I only think we tried too hard to believe in our new playbook.
@tombRaider_kw@Terminal_fi@convergeonchain Solid recommendation.
We hold ourselves to higher standards than screwing retail just to tick a TGE box. Sorry to disappoint.
@coinfoin_@levelusd I’m not going to comment on why the situations differ, that’d be out of place.
Both projects had Pendle pools and cancelled TGE, but that still doesn’t make the situations identical.
You’re sharp enough to know what’s going on.
@0xTindorr@Terminal_fi@convergeonchain We're genuinely sorry about this.
It’s not that trivial of a move, given the timelines we were operating under.
Going for a risky pivot to tick a box is outright crime.
I’ll probably livestream to share broader context on this.
We’re not benefiting from this outcome.