The idea and concept is great.
But the buyback is for the team to own more shares of their own company. It’s sort of like an investment on their own company… an asset in the balance sheet.
If you distribute the buyback into this proposal they are effectively giving away 50% of their revenue… Im I right?
3 Likes
Only if you assume that stakers who get distributions do not buy more JUP. This idea is so beautiful in that:
- It rewards only stakers (those who don’t stake benefit from buybacks right now more so than stakers, who are locked up for at least 30 days)
- It incentivizes staking, so the market will conduct the same role as the buybacks at the end of the day
- It gives people an actual reason to hold JUP for the long term
Buying an asset on balance sheet that is worth nothing, results in having more of something that is worth nothing…
I strongly believe that this path is better for JUP. Recall too that the minority of JUP supply is staked… all the buybacks are doing right now are rewarding people who aren’t staking… who are dumping into the buying pressure with every opportunity.
1 Like
just made an account to fully support this fee paradigm shift
3 Likes
What I meant is in relation to the ownership of the buyback… the JUP stored in the litterbox actually belongs to them correct? If so, distributing JUP to the stakers would mean that they are giving away 50% of their revenue… that’s my understanding.
Thanks for your comment
1 Like
This is reality, SOL went 2.74% up today and JUP is down 0.02%, future of crypto are fee earning protocols. Yes, but not for owner of protocols, but for owner of tokens.
If Jupiter does not break that cycle of shitcoins, scammers, KOLs, presidents, and all it is, is paying cadets tokens to post JUP IS HOME on Twitter timeline ( also called RAIDING ) this will all be futile experiment.
If Jup is home, and future of crypto is fee earning protocols, what do owners of token on protocols get?
In jupiter case you get 40% down when SOL is 20% down, and 20% up when Sol is 40% up, meaning Opportunity cost of 200% in every direction up and down, with enough volatility you get diminished into nothing, thats void of any FUD that we have regularly Libra, Meow hacked, using strategic reserve when token is at all time low, with more FUD, team starting exiting in 2026… opportunity cost will be … infinite. ( yes you get 3% a month if you stake, thats already lost in opportunity cost today compared to SOL )
4 Likes
This is a phenomenal idea. Such detailed thoughts on market mechanics and buybacks- the team really should take notice to this. I cant think of an angle that you didn’t cover already. If this goes to vote, you got my 50k voting power friend.
2 Likes
absolutely fantastic, Id encourage more discussion.
im all about this
Nice effort here - well done. I’d be up for finding a balance, i.e. finding the fair % of the buyback allocation that could be repurposed to stakers. Problem with buyback and burn is that price discovery in crypto is all over the place - typical of high risk assets. In the short-term, not possible to anticipate price impact. So allocating 50% of protocol revenue to buybacks and potentially burn is not ideal.
1 Like
Absolutely right, sir! Things like this make me bullish on Jup again. Thanks for fighting for stakers interests what the current dao is completely blind to.
1 Like
@MaxSol This is one of the strongest economic optimization proposals I’ve seen
—clear, well argued, and mathematically grounded.
But I’d like to invite a complementary lens: what if the fee distribution problem is just one layer of a much deeper system misalignment?
When we optimize for economic efficiency without examining the underlying value architecture, we risk perfecting the incentives inside a broken model.
What if the real opportunity is to redesign the model itself?
1 Like
Redistributing commissions to stakers creates value, higher returns than buybacks. It is a choice that rewards and strengthens the community excellent
This is pretty much interest and highly relevant
Major props to Maxsol for this absolute banger of an essay. It doesn’t just rant — it builds. It lays out a real framework for how $JUP could connect protocol revenue to token value through mechanisms like fee redistribution to stakers, a transparent DAO-managed treasury, and smart emission control. You know — the kind of practical, well-thought-out stuff you’d expect from a mature DAO roadmap, but somehow never quite makes it into official resolutions.
And to everyone chiming in on this thread: thanks for reminding me that not all of us came here just to print memes and collect ASR. Some of us actually thought we were building something serious.
But here’s the reality check: in just a few days, this thread — and everything inside it — will likely fall completely outside the jurisdiction of the DAO. Why? Because the resolution up for vote has surgically removed any mention of token utility, protocol fee control, or anything that might accidentally impact the price of JUP in a real way. The new mandate? Promote the product. Not govern it. We’ll fund grants. We’ll post reels. We’ll clap on command.
But token value? That’s someone else’s job.
And you know what really gets me? The stats. The DAO Resolution Pt.1 thread has roughly the same number of views as this essay. We have over 200,000 wallets staked into the DAO… and only 1.5K views on what might be the most important vote to date. If that doesn’t tell you where the energy is — or isn’t — I don’t know what does. And hey, maybe that’s why utility was left out. Because if it were in, more people might’ve actually started asking questions.
Also kind of funny (or not): not a single team member has commented in this thread. One of the most thoughtful and engaged discussions on this entire forum — met with complete silence. Almost like… they don’t want to talk about it?
After writing a ton of essays here, I’ve come to accept a simple truth: I’ve been heard, but not listened to. Which, to be fair, is what you do with a toddler. You smile, you nod, you wait for nap time.
To my disappointment, maybe the team is right. Maybe the DAO, in the end, is a failed concept — one that can’t be trusted with real capital. I mean, what would most people do if they had the keys to the treasury? Probably just vote to burn all the JUP or pay themselves a bonus. It’s human nature. And honestly? Can’t even blame Meow. He had good intentions. But at this scale, it’s easier to hand out coloring books than keys.
So yeah… if we do somehow flip the bull market switch back on, BTC will lift all boats — even the ones docked in Copium Harbor. My only ask is this: maybe don’t dump the remaining 7 billion JUP on our heads all at once. Let us pretend supply and demand still matters.
And please — no more JUP token distributions. We’ve got $10 million in USDC. Let’s market responsibly — like the good little brand ambassadors we are — and ride this hype cycle like it’s our job.
Because… well, it is.
1 Like
Liked your view .. interesting 
1 Like
It took me 5 minutes to think about it and half an hour to write it. Immediately implementing the redistribution of fees to stakers is essential to prevent $JUP from following predictable cycles that lead to stagnation and loss of value. Based on market dynamics and historical cycles, if the situation remains unchanged, we can estimate that within 3 years, in 2028, the value of the token could drop to around $0.10-$0.15, reflecting a decline in interest and perceived utility. Within 5 years, in 2030, in a dead period without concrete interventions, it could stabilize between $0.05-$0.08, showing a significant reduction in value and a risk of total collapse.
Following this scheme, even with a 35% return for staking, stakers would only see partial compensation, with no real sustainable gains. Blindly relying on an invisible system does not guarantee stability or growth. If the team doesn’t act, by 2026, it is expected that 80% of aware users could sell, leaving the project without a solid community support.
An immediate action, such as redistributing commissions to stakers, would guarantee tangible benefits and strengthen community engagement. Changing attitude now is the only way to preserve the value of the token and ensure a sustainable future for $JUP and its ecosystem. Trust is built with clear and transparent actions, not with long-term promises. Let’s change course now!! I’ve been trying for years to propose A game That makes real money for everyone even in lean times
3 Likes