This isn’t the action of just anyone or a random whale; the wallet in question belongs to Binance themselves. This is a blatant attempt to manipulate the outcome of the proposal by leveraging their voting power. To put it mildly, your logical fallacies are laughable if not comical Radovan. This move completely contradicts what PCs preaches and claims to stand for - namely, being the best decentralized exchange. It directly undermines their purported commitment to decentralization, which is one of their core values. By taking this action, they are not only betraying the principles they publicly promote, but they are also damaging the very foundation of trust that has allowed the platform to grow.
5 Likes
The entire Magpie ecosystem has proven to be a complete failure—parasitic subDAOs, confusion around the token, and in the specific case of Cakepie, mCAKE has depegged. The system is complicated to use, IFOs are fragmented across multiple platforms, and no other DEX has such a convoluted and bubble-filled tokenomics as Pancake. I fully support this proposal and can’t wait for these bribes leechers to be removed. It’s unacceptable that a DEX with such massive numbers—currently the second-largest—has such a struggling and devalued token, despite having been deflationary for months.
Also, constantly bringing up the 25 million CAKE staked as an “attack” on governance is just stupid. Those who hold this voting power have held, accumulated, and bought those 25 million CAKE at a price that has been consistently crushed by overwhelming sell pressure. Whoever owns those 25 million has the right to express their vote.
2 Likes
You’ve all been given the same tutorial about “parasites”
3 Likes
Again, what you’re saying is simply not true. They don’t have to tie up funds to benefit from veCake. That’s the entire purpose of liquid wrapped Cake as it trades within a ballpark range of the real Cake, even if it’s not perfectly pegged. Claiming that new buyers have to lock their funds is simply incorrect, as they can get the same benefits without needing to lock their Cake. The only tradeoff is that liquid wrapped Cake trades below the peg. Let’s stick to the facts and avoid obfuscating things with inaccurate information, please.
1 Like
Agree that trust will be damaged, but it´s not the first time I’ve got slapped in the face by PCS, but this time it’s worth. Look you can laugh, but if you are not wealthy enough just to overvote the binance wallet as the main investor in PCS you just need to argue and call for justice, this is your right to do. If CZ is behind this… which I hope for… I fully support it even I lose a lot. PCS is the best dex on BSC, and to become the best on new chains should change drastically it´s core to compete with them. Step out from your bubble protecting only your interests…as said I´m going to lose a lot and despite of this, fully agree this change is needed.
1 Like
Because it is simple like that… no need for A4 long stories.
1 Like
Looking at the data, CakePie only has 3% of all CAKE locked - hardly enough to reduce sell pressure. I’d rather see that CAKE going toward a guaranteed 4% burn and incentivizing quality projects.
The mCAKE peg sitting at 0.66 (a 40% deviation, not 15-30%) shows the system isn’t working. When users raise concerns about this widening gap, CakePie just says “be more patient” while minting more CKP to secure votes.
Your claim that SubDAOs “permanently remove CAKE from circulation” isn’t accurate - they create wrapped versions with serious peg issues. And when the peg deteriorates this badly, any price correlation becomes meaningless.
The proposal targets high-value pools that generate actual volume, making reduced emissions more efficient than the current system that wastes incentives on low-impact pools.
The tokenomics simplification addresses what many users want - a transparent system that delivers on its promises instead of complexity that benefits only a few.
4 Likes
40% below peg!! Some people have lost 40% due to the subdao incompetence
3 Likes
And CKP has dropped 70% over the past few months but no ideas to pull the price back up
2 Likes
That’s false on so many levels. You’re completely overlooking the significant benefits and flexibility (not having to lock your Cake) of the SubDAOs, such as the revenue they generate for liquid Cake stakers and the voting incentives they provide. It is 100% accurate that SubDAOs permanently remove Cake from circulation because when you convert real Cake into wrapped Cake, the real Cake you hand over is permanently locked, meaning it’s permanently removed from circulation. This makes it a deflationary mechanism.
You also neglect to mention StakeDao and two other SubDAOs, all of which have the same deflationary mechanisms in place. And let’s not forget the elephant in the room: the unsustainable burn model. A burn-only mechanism struggles with scalability as the price of Cake increases, since the same volume will burn fewer tokens. In contrast, the veCake model becomes more effective as the price rises, attracting more bribes from ecosystem projects and better aligning incentives for long-term holders. This is an irrefutable advantage of the veCake model compared to a burn-only mechanism.
4 Likes
Let me ask you a simple question and please try to answer in simple words, not overcomplicating… why PCS would need subdao and what is the benefit of having subdao onboard for PCS, the benefit which PCS cannot do on it´s own and subdao is required. Reading all this, everyone is definitely asking the same…why are those subdao guys even here?
2 Likes
It’s revealing that while PancakeSwap’s market has been picking up, we constantly see complaints across Telegram about “how low the bribes are this week.” These bribes have steadily decreased despite improved market conditions - which completely undermines your argument about the veCAKE system’s sustainability.
You claim SubDAOs “permanently remove CAKE” but ignore that they create problematic wrapped versions with failing pegs. The supposed benefits of “flexibility” are meaningless when mCAKE trades at a 40% discount and users can’t exit without significant losses.
The combined TVL of all SubDAOs still represents a tiny fraction of the total CAKE supply. If this model worked so well, we’d see growing adoption rather than declining pegs and decreasing bribes.
Your scalability argument also fails when you consider how the proposed model targets emissions to high-volume pools - creating more efficient burn mechanisms than the current system that scatters rewards to low-impact pools through bribes.
The data shows what’s actually working versus what looks good in theory. Users want simplicity, transparency, and real value - not complexity that mostly benefits SubDAO operators.
3 Likes
Calling long time holders as parasites is the lowest human behavior i ve ever seen in crypto world..lets not play games, fool ourselves and tell the awful truth on crypto..the only decentralized thing in cryptoworld is bitcoin..all others have owners either way as solo or group and they mostly want dictatorship on their assets to manipulate price and get financial gain on bull markets and try to dump mostly before bear market starts. Most people know it so well and thats why Btc smashes altcoins like worthless garbages cos they are indeed centralized worthless garbages. Hence, by approving this proposal Cake team will admit there is no room for decentralization on PCS and they want dictatorship on Cake and their solo aim is price manipulation on upcoming altseason and they wanna dump fast before bear comes so they dont want to be blocked by long time locks and commitments and long time “parasites”..Well thats a fair intention in crypto as %99 of crypto world is like this except holy Satoshi Nakamoto and half-alien Vitalik Buterin:)..but if you wanna do it you should play with rules..only 3rd world countries leaders change rules easily to gain power and eliminate their rivals so trust towards those countries are lowest so their currencies are garbages comparing to constitutional 1st world countries..if you wanna gain power dont change rules like a banana republic or a middle-eastern authocracy just stand with your rules and find ways to regain power by not breaking trust..Cakepie worths 5m usd so it can be acquired by Cz even during lunch..no need to demolish rules and hard earned trust for that
4 Likes
They provide the same benefits as those who lock their Cake for 4 years directly on PancakeSwap, but without the need to lock or vote manually. You can unstake the liquid wrapped Cake whenever you want and sell whenever you want. It’s a “set and forget” system and you only need to claim your rewards. No manual management is required. If you delegate your voting power to them, they manage it for you. You don’t have to vote manually. Additionally, they permanently remove Cake from circulation. These SubDaos are deflationary mechanisms, as the tokens that get converted will never re-enter circulation.
1 Like
mcake depegged cakepie fail
3 Likes
Thanks for explaining. Not using this to be honest. Like to control my cake via ledger wallets so any new interaction is just another moving part which can go wrong. But that´s me. Ppl mainly advocating subdao here so wanted to know more about that but no not interested and I think can be replaced by native PCS feature so all stays under one roof. That´s my opinion and most probably the PCS leaders and whales thinking same way. 3.0 offfers more points so we should not be focusing only on subdao offboarding imo which if major enough will not pass the vote.
1 Like
Your entire argument can easily be undermined, as it is based purely on speculation and wishful thinking. You have provided no evidence to support the claim that the new burn-only model will magically be more successful or efficient than the current veCake model, or that it will result in a price increase. The entire market has experienced a significant drop, not just the price of Cake.
The decrease in bribes could be attributed to multiple factors, and there is no evidence to suggest that it is directly caused by the veTokenomics themselves. CakePie alone has already locked approximately 13 million Cake in less than two years, which is certainly not negligible. Did you expect them to instantly remove 95% of the supply from circulation? That argument is entirely absurd.
Additionally, you are completely ignoring the benefits provided by SubDAO’s for Cake stakers, which have generated substantial revenue and offered very juicy farming and staking APRs for countless months. I also don’t accept your peg argument, as the peg could theoretically tighten to a 1:1 ratio at any time, and it hasn’t always been a 40% deviation. For example, the SdCake peg is much closer to 1:1 than the CakePie peg.
In summary, it’s easy to dismantle your logical fallacies. I have presented an irrefutable fact demonstrating why the veCake model is clearly superior and more efficient than a burn-only model as the price increases. The veCake model attracts more bribe income, whereas a burn-only model will burn fewer tokens (= less than target deflation) as the price rises. This is an undeniable advantage of the veTokenomics, along with other benefits such as significantly reduced sell pressure, as tokens are locked for the long term.
1 Like
2.5 should have never been approved…damage already happened. time to fix it. 3.0 will simplify and “reset” all the bugs in tokenomy. Nice speech yes. Ppl talking about decentralization like willing to gain control… same here. Just go and buy tokens so you overvote… not wealthy enough to buy 25M everyone is claiming as those will vote for 3.0…welcome in the decentralized world. If you are too small to change anything, that’s how decentralization feels like so actually your frustration confirms it´s not easy to manipulate same as it is not easy be wealthy enough to buy 25M 
2 Likes
Maybe it would be enough to cap mcake to 5-10% instead of current 25% in the gauge voting as it gets too much cake IMO. Much more than native cake pool so the question is whether PCS can just introduce same automation to native pool and motivate ppl staying in PCS instead of delegating voting power to subdao. Or the intention is to unlock tokens, flood the market with free tokens, let the price fall so whales can rebuy and you will never see cake below 5usd again. A lot of questions true… offboarding subdao is easy, reducing emission as well. The good example of voting illusion is the cap size which is decided by pcs you can just vote for your pool… 100% of decentralized governance is just not possible in any company.
1 Like
Exactly, the CAKE tokens are available. Do you want your vote to carry weight? Buy 25 million CAKE, lock them for 4 years, and vote.
2 Likes