No, it has always been 50/50 from the start. “The core thesis that underpins the JUP Tokenomics is the idea of 50/50”. We are in this together. In good times and bad times. And this is not even a bad time, lol
3 Likes
Hi, please correct me if i am wrong on this take, but i think you don’t “loose” anything at all with the reduction of jupuaries airdrop.
Yes, you get 30% less rewards, but at the same time your rewards are 30% less diluted. it’s a zero sum!
Again, you get 30% less $jup but at the same time your amount of jup will be worth 30% more because there is simply less $jup in the system after the last distribution.
Think of it like bitcoin. We are in the early years mining (trading/swaping) and during that time the final supply would be reduced to 14 Mio. You get less, but at the same time it’s worth more.
@lochie2001 so i think it should not even be seen as “con” having “reduced incentives”
Cheers
2 Likes
The thing that brought a lot of hype to JUP in the first place was how good the airdrop was.
Will 30% still be deemed “good”
2 Likes
I get the deflationary aspect of it, however it still will be increasing circulating supply. Doesnt neccesariy mean a increased price by 30% ofc.
Thank you for sharing however ! 
2 Likes
30% reduction just means that everything will be worth that much more. In my opinion, If people sell off in January, it would definitely be beneficial for previous holders if less new coins are in circulation. I think the reduction is going to increase overall value if it passes.
4 Likes
Beautiful article, thank you for sharing it and igniting the discussion 
With Michael Saylor’s Bitcoin 2024 keynote speech still resonating in my mind, it really poses the comparison: Would anyone vote “yes” if the same proposal was on the table for BTC?
If we fast forward to when GUM is a reality, will we regret having burned the 30%?
I know, there’s a difference between 9.99B already minted and the 19.78M out of 21M available, so these two are probably not comparable on this level.
Still, that’s my question: Will the burn help the long term goal, that Meow himself said we are currently very far away from?
2 Likes
Yeah there is defs a thought in the back of my mind regarding high circulating supply. will be noted for sure!
2 Likes
Thats actaully a very interesting example. BC i know as a fact people wouldnt automatically jump to a “YES LETS BURN BTC”.
$JUP is the BTC of the sol blockchain, its an “A” tier token, yet people simply jump straight to what everyone else is voting.
2 Likes
JUP isn’t a meme though. JUP will always get compared to UNI so FDV is always a concern.
2 Likes
Continuing the discussion from 30% Supply reduction : Pro's and Con's:
The other aspect is that the burn, if passed, would not touch circulating supply. The tables presented in Proposal: Enhance certainty for JUP holders and community via a token supply reduction show that it’s the reserves, both Team and Community, that would get burned. So the question is – what effect will burning 30% of reserves have, considering also that the burn will be spread over 6+ months?
If my understanding is correct then the first time we gonna “feel” the outcome of the burn is in Jan 2025. But maybe I’m missing something…
2 Likes
Voting for for sure i hate much tokens without value let’s go parabolic guys
2 Likes