There is a deep dive into uniswap profitability here and a fantastic tool by the same guy here
But the tldr basically is that while you do have a constant product of the two tokens, the dollar or DAI denominated value of your portion of each pool is reduced the further away the price moves away from your original valuation (the ratio of your deposit) when compared to hodling.
- a 1.50x price change results in a 2.0% loss relative to HODL
- a 2x price change results in a 5.7% loss relative to HODL
- a 3x price change results in a 13.4% loss relative to HODL
- a 4x price change results in a 20.0% loss relative to HODL
- a 5x price change results in a 25.5% loss relative to HODL
In theory, you could buy a bunch of ant before the snapshot took place and sell on the next block thereby buying voting power with the only cost being the slippage from the bonding curve. The deeper the liquidity the cheaper this is to do. There may be others but that’s at the forefront of my mind.
Given we are talking about adding liquidity to a bonding curve for liquidity and not paying binance, this would not fall foul IMO.
I’m definitely in favor, especially of its a small amount in uniswap built up over time. But it isn’t simply a case of just adding liquidity without modelling the various scenarios with regards to profit and loss. Then there is the management, this may potentially cause extra regulatory burden