Whitelist SundaeSwap ADA/iUSD LP token

Having iAssets available on DEXs is a key factor to promote Indigo’s integration into the broader ecosystem, allowing other users to obtain and use iAssets without having to manage a CDP.

Users who provide liquidity to DEXs receive LP tokens proving they have deposited iAssets. Indigo rewards users who provide iAsset liquidity by allowing them to stake their LP tokens in the protocol and receive INDY rewards.

I propose we whitelist the SundaeSwap ADA/iUSD LP token to earn rewards within Indigo.

The policy ID for the LP token to whitelist is:


The fingerprint is:



Hi all!

Pi here; Happy to answer any questions that you might have.


Disapprove. I do not think we should WL any token pairs from Sundae Swap.


I do not approve using SundaeSwap to stake LPs - plus there is a conflict of interest. Christopher Borders (cborders) is SundaeSwap’s lawyer in an upcoming TRIAL and a team member of Indigo. He is currently being sued for LP issues. It’s best SundaeSwap step way from this community driven opportunity.

Check out the judge’s recent statement, on pdf attached.

“Defendants’ argument that Plaintiff has failed to state a claim for promissory estoppel is
similarly unavailing. The most salient term of the Gentleman’s Agreement — tokens for liquidity pools — is certainly “clear and definite” enough to support the claim that a promise was made.”

cBorders is a defendant in pdf below:
CardStarter-Ltd-v-SundaeSwap-Inc-et-al-candce-22-00757-0055-0.pdf (222.1 KB)


Totally disagree with any type of relationship with Sundaeswap. As others members has stated Sundaeswap has being sued for fraud and breach of contract related to LP, they are bad apples to cardano ecosystem. We should stay away from this type of protocol.

1 Like

Wow this is new, we( Indigo) should have no relationship with any type of protocol that has disrespect the community. Sundaeswap is a fraud.

Plus if this is not enough, they also have relationship with alameda, they have received a seed fund from them.

NO to Sundaeswap.


I agree, TOO MANY RED FLAGS, with SundaeSwap

1 Like

This proposal pleases us … I CONCUR !!!

With legal complications… it’s a no for me.



(I posted this on the other proposal as well, but I think the arguments are the same for both.)

Since there’s been some interest, I figured I’d try to do a good faith analysis of what I see as the upsides and downsides of this proposal.

The main downside would be diluting the rewards that go to other liquidity providers for other DEX’s that get whitelisted. However, the rewards that are distributed are in proportion to the TVL of the relevant DEX; In practice, this means that the rewards allocated to members of the indigo community would more closely match the distribution of the preferred DEX’s of said community.

The main upside to whitelisting these assets is that it would encourage a diversity of options for liquidity sources, which would help iAssets maintain their peg. A greater diversity in markets for the iAsset to trade mean that the aggregate price of the iAsset is more resilient to market events like hacks, outages, etc. It also creates more opportunities for arbitrage, the mechanism by which iAssets maintain their peg.

While the SundaeSwap protocol doesn’t have the largest liquidity in the market, it still represents a substantial share of the Cardano community. I think that whitelisting the iAsset pools wouldn’t disproportionately dilute the INDY rewards for the INDY community, and would help the Indigo protocol achieve it’s goals of providing stable and accurate pricing of their synthetic assets.

Pi Lanningham