Yes sure I’ve used all features of Jupiter a lot including perps. I did millions of USD in volume on perps with 100X leverage.
To clarify the point you responded to; the total costs for producing the volume is roughly equal between swaps and peprs, but not the fees.
Costs includes slippage, Liquidity pool dynamics and third party fees. An example of third party fees; when Jupiter routes a trade through Raydium you’ll have 0.22% going into the Raydium pool and 0.03% into Ray.
You can easily test it out with $2000 of volume and see that the costs (reduction of the SOL or USDC) amount is roughly equal, assuming you use a large stable asset to test with like WBTC. The costs of doing $2000 volume is roughly equal between swap and perps. I am assuming 100X leverage on perps with $10 (one open and one close).
For swaps you’d have to look at how much SOL you have before and after the trade.
I think that Jupiter is more after onboarding as many users as possible to Solana block chain and decided to repeat the jupuary to reward and encourage more people to use Jupiter.
With that in mind, I think that
It is essential to reward every wallet with a general amount just like it was done in the last airdrop.
It could be between 10 to 20 jup per wallet.
The team could easily come up with a way to identify clusters as much as possible to reduce allocations going to those gaming the system.
This can also discourage farmers in the next airdrop as it will be too much work to keep farming so many wallets just to get peanuts rewards. This will be different for a random user who really used the platform without farming but because they are new to crypto and have less funds, are very short on the volume based criterias many are suggesting.
This is enough incentive to encourage them to continue using Jupiter and Solana.
Every other proposal here is only suggesting that the Jupiter team should distribute the airdrop to favour their own farming. Everything aside the stakers rewards seems to only favour the actual farmers and we all know that they are the ones with enough funds to farm. I think volume based airdrop for a season 2 airdrop is so wrong because that’s actually the target of farmers.
The DCA and other features are the same too even though it might be a few people who will be able to use them since it needs a lot of fund to really use them effectively eg. Perps.
Another thing is that they are forgetting other products like bridging, ape etc.
I think that it is best to just give people that used each of those other products an amount more than others. For example, a wallet qualifying for 200 jup from the main product swapping can get extra 10 jup for each of the other products they used.
In conclusion, I love how Jupiter always tries to include the community in decision making but for any season 2 and subsequent airdrops, it is an inefficient thing to do since there is no initial criteria made known to the community.
Each person trying to propose anything now will drift more to what is favourable to them.
It is enough community contribution to allow us to vote on a few proposals the team comes up with since they have the best data, and goes well with the purpose of the project.
Yes the team could apply a multiplier for new types of trading volume like 1.5X for example.
It would be completely up to the team, and I think both proposal versions are viable. It was confirmed that they have read my proposals and other proposals.
Yes we are now all waiting for the team’s proposal. They will likely implement many aspects which were suggested by the community.
I agree that it is not great for those from certain countries to whom $100 or $1000 is a lot of money.
That having said, with some web 3.0 work you could probably make $10 - $100 and use it to start trading. You would be able to reach $100+ or $1000+ transaction volume.
It has been confirmed by Meow that this will not be the case.
For more updates you can check this short transcript from the latest Townhall:
Hey @JUPWhale following the thread of @miuq and his latest updates No JUP for DAO voters, would be interested to see a reformulated proposal from you and every community member that would like to update theirs
Don’t think Meow has explicitly stated ‘no Jupuary for stakers…’. Will be worth waiting for the initial proposal before going into these reformulation thing as that might or not be the case until that drafted proposal is released.
I believe this is a flawed approach as holders can manipulate rewards by opening finite wallets with 10 jup to get more rewards n only looks more decentralized when in reality its not
Great post and nice work. I like the updated formula however I think one problem still remains. 700m air drop (over 50% of the current circulating supply) is just too extreme. Users are growing because its good product not because of the rewards. It would be nice to see more revenue n a more conservative and gradual increase in token supply
No one’s gonna turn it down, you need every bit you can get n you still won’t keep up with the inflation. Even half the people turned it down you Would still end up with an over diluted token with no value. You realize the only value the token has are the rewards but if you issue too many tokens it loses its value n defeats the purpose. It’s simple, just reduce the inflation to 10% per year or less and you can have smaller jupuaries and asr for 20+ years. If you want more jup you can buy it thus creating demand
