SLURP-61 | Launch Espresso Liquid Staking (stESP)

SLURPs
1

Summary

This proposal seeks DAO approval to deploy stake.link’s liquid staking infrastructure for Espresso’s ESP token the following weeks as ESP’s TGE went live last week. By launching stESP as one of the first liquid staking solutions for Espresso, stake.link can capture first-mover advantage in a high-quality infrastructure protocol while advancing our multi-asset liquid staking strategy.

Motivation & Rationale

Espresso launched its $ESP token as part of its transition to decentralized proof-of-stake consensus. The network serves as consensus infrastructure for major rollup chains, providing fast finality and interoperability for the multi-chain ecosystem.

ESP Token Details:

  • ERC-20 on Ethereum: 0x031de51f3e8016514bd0963d0b2ab825a591db9a

  • Initial supply: 3.59 billion ESP

  • Staking contract: 0x36ad45A4931d0E226010BE9A8477D400C8bB3d9C

  • Validator set: Dynamic top 100 by total stake

Strategic Opportunity

Espresso is distributing 10% of total supply (359M ESP) via airdrop to 1M+ eligible addresses, with staking bonuses up to 420% for 2-year lock commitments. This could create staking demand at launch.

Strategic Alignment:

  • Extends our multi-asset LST platform beyond LINK & POL

  • Infrastructure protocol narrative aligns with stake.link positioning

  • Leverages proven stLINK/wstLINK DeFi architecture

  • First-mover advantage critical in LST markets

Revenue Potential: Following our standard model, stESP generates protocol fees from staking rewards, with a portion distributed to SDL stakers (reSDL holders) - similar to stLINK & stPOL.

Specification

stESP: Rebase token reflecting staking rewards (similar to stLINK)
wstESP: Wrapped, non-rebase version for DeFi composability (similar to wstLINK)

Potential Timeline

  • Deploy stESP/wstESP contracts

  • Enable stake.link staking interface

  • Deploy a market for ESP/stESP on Curve Ethereum

  • Start working on DeFi composability for wstESP

  • Enable wstESP bridging to Espresso chains or others via CCIP if there is demand

Protocol Benefits

  • First-mover advantage in quality infrastructure protocol

  • Revenue diversification through new asset class

  • Cross-selling opportunities to Espresso ecosystem users

  • No

Governance Process:

  1. Community Discussion: ~7 days

  2. Formal Vote: Council Snapshot vote

  3. Implementation: Deployment kickoff via stake.link’s website, marketing on social

Conclusion

Espresso represents a strategic opportunity to establish stake.link as the default liquid staking solution for high-quality infrastructure protocol. With 1M+ airdrop recipients, enhanced staking rewards, and major ecosystem partnerships, timing is critical to capture market share before competitors emerge.

This proposal advances stake.link’s multi-asset vision while leveraging our proven technical architecture and operational expertise in the liquid staking space.

2 Likes
2

I am in favor of this proposal as another avenue for us to expand

1 Like
3

OK;LG

Collecting st tokens like it’s my job. Props to the team for finding the opportunity and executing.

1 Like
4

Expansion sounds good, but what exactly is the stake.link platform getting into here?

Admittedly I did not follow stPOL development but at the moment it seems to be largely a flop. Correct me if I am wrong. How much $$ and time was spent on the stPOL integration? Do we know if that effort has been paid back to the protocol or is it just a nice to have right now?

I don’t want to write this one off, but let’s look at stake.link’s place in all of this. LINK staking makes sense since the base for this protocol is made up of top chainlink node ops. Is there any real link to espresso from a tech point of view besides calling this ESP token liquid staked? Is stake.link meant to be a dumping ground for all liquid staking tokens now?

That said, I am still in agreement with this as a land grab opportunity. The chainlink ecosystem is slow to move, and this offers potential new revenue sources and value for SDL holders in particular. The only thing I want to see is the financial impact of doing this vs what we have available in the budget. I think the easiest quick and dirty way would be stPOL, but I assume that integration paved the way for faster and cheaper rollouts for other LSTs.

5

iirc the grants alone made stPOL worth it. I imagine its something similar here. I don’t think the team would pursue creating a liquid staking token for something that wouldn’t immediately add value.

but would need them to confirm