If different AVS each have their own LRT/LP pools, liquidity will be fragmented like 'shattered glass'. Solayer directly incorporates 'liquidity unification' into the underlying design: all AVS Token liquidity is concentrated around the pair sSOL-SOL, rather than each AVS pulling its own pool. The benefit of doing this is—deeper transaction depth, less price impact, and it also supports instant unpacking of AVS Tokens back to sSOL, reducing exit costs.
This is different from the common 'multiple LST pooling'. The depth of multiple LST pools depends on the weakest link, which can easily 'walk on thin ice' in extreme market conditions; Solayer narrows the connection to the main channel of sSOL ⟷ SOL, equivalent to creating a unified 'home port' for AVS Tokens. You need to change routes, first return to the home port (sSOL), and then set off, resulting in a shorter path and less impact.
From an asset abstraction perspective, sSOL = the 'accounting foundation' of staking/re-staking. The protocol encapsulates the accumulation of 'staking returns + re-staking returns' in the accounting of sSOL, allowing users to 'use it like SOL' in various DeFi applications while retaining the withdrawal channel—this hides the 'engineering complexity' in the protocol and leaves the 'user experience' to the users.
This kind of 'merger' design has another spillover value: it reduces the difficulty of launching the AVS team—pulling one less pool and doing one more function. This is especially important in the early stages of the ecosystem. The overall goal is to twist the three tasks of 're-staking—liquidity—exit' into one thread, rather than having three segments each stuck in traffic.
Treat sSOL as the 'port' and AVS Token as the 'route'. How to operate the ship can be quite free, but it’s best if everyone returns to the same deep-water port, which can withstand storms.
@Solayer #BuiltonSolayer $LAYER