The OpCo is clearly a key SP for the Balancer ecosystem being the maintainers of the front end (which is an industry leading UI in terms of UX), overseeing SP relationship execution and now hosting the legal department. The proposal is well written and outlines all the major costs and responsibilities.
In terms of the budget specifics, I feel that $1.1M in total comp (USD + BAL) for 5 product/front end engineers is a lot of money given the environment, in addition to the ~$160k for front end costs. I think it’s valid to recognize both points mentioned here for the yes vote (Opco is a required element, and the front end is crucial for Balancer) and also be concerned about a budget of this size and the precedent that sets for other SPs or contributors who are doing an admirable job trying to reduce costs to align with the macro market and the state of the Balancer treasury/revenue, but don’t want to be the only ones.
If the only other option is to sunset the front-end as noted then of course this BIP should be voted through. It would be hard to dispute that whatever the request. I guess I’m just feeling disappointed because even though the UI is explicitly valuable, the high budgets have eaten into the revenue/viability for veBAL holders (and Aura, post launch) with the treasury % increase, redirection to core pools, flash sale of BAL. I’m just generally concerned and hoping it doesn’t continue to do so.
To clarify, I just wanted to say my piece in here and don’t speak for anyone else, would imagine this would get voted through regardless.