No, the way you are stating things is inaccurate. ASR from the leftover Jupuary has already been taken care of, it’s absolutely nothing to do with this Jupuary!
Your posts are so biased (and often factually incorrect) it’s tiring to read them all. I’m surprised you have the energy to continually post, but then I guess you have an interest in pushing your biased agenda.
I agree. Swap volume is also where we extract earnings for the system, yes?
JUP Stakers received 200M JUP from Jupuary round #1 unclaimed tokens. Of course that’s related to Jupuary. It came from the Jupuary allocation.
Yes it has been taken care of. This means there is a compensation structure in place for JUP stakers. If you think the 200M JUP (45% APY) ASR isn’t enough, you can complain about that separately - but that has nothing to do with Jupuary.
Which means that a proportionate allocation for January is appropriate.
The 700M Jupuary allocation is meant to be distributed among the entire community. It is an airdrop to distribute JUP to Jupiter users, not a compensation for performing certain actions such as holding and staking JUP.
In this video Meow restated one of Jupiter’s goals which is ‘‘to get JUP into the hands of the people who use Jupiter’’.
JUP stakers at around ~ 300,000 with over $50 staked, represent just 7.7% of the total Jupiter user base of 3,885,443 users with $100+ volume. That’s why allocating 10% of Jupuary towards stakers is appropriate.
Especially considering the purpose of Jupuary. The main focus is to engage new Jupiter users and bring them into the Jupiter ecosystem.
So, JUPUARY isn’t just a reward for stakers but a strategic airdrop to build Jupiter’s inclusive, growth-focused community!
To clarify: JUPUARY and Active Staker Rewards (ASR) are separate. The 200M JUP given to stakers from unclaimed JUPUARY #1 tokens is compensation for staking, providing a solid 45% APY. This rewards long-term JUP holders for their commitment.
JUPUARY’s 700M JUP, however, is meant to expand Jupiter’s reach, focusing on the entire user base (3.8M+ users). Its main goal is to grow the community, incentivize engagement, and bring new users into the ecosystem.
Unpopular opinion, how about we use good size of the 700M to drop JUP into random active SOL wallets who have not interacted with Jupiter exchange or related products? Would that indeed be great for marketing and growing the community with NEW members rather than rewarding the existing ones?
depends if they are gonna know what it is or what to do with it. if they dont know about asr theyll sell it for pennies
thanks you jupiter! you are the best!
Airdrop strategy does work, but there’s a few things to keep in mind
We’ve done 100,000 airdrops for one of our tokens, so we do have quite a bit of experience with it and data analysed.
Here is an example strategy:
With 2300 SOL ($383,000) and 10M JUP you could airdrop 10 JUP (~ $10) per wallet to 1,000,000 (1 Million) wallets. The wallets could for example be the top 10,000 holders of the top 100 largest market cap tokens on Solana, totalling 1,000,000 wallets airdropped.
Ideally you’d adjust the airdrop amount for each token / market cap, or set a certain minimum like $100 held etc. but this is just a rough version of the airdrop strategy.
This might be something for a workgroup proposal @miuq
This is just a proposal and nothing has been finalised yet. Good luck!
LMAO this is hilarious
Interesting. I’ve thought you may have been sent here by the team to break the ice of jupuary discussions and guide it towards a certain model, before the official proposal goes live. If you are not, maybe you could offer them help with the past experience to make jupuary count the best way possible. And not a bad idea for a working group either.
I’ve not been in contact with the team, but I would love to assist them with it!
I’m also remain open to further adjust my Jupuary #2 proposal based on valid arguments. It would also depend a lot on the preferences of the team.
DAO / JUP Stakers
For example it would be an option to increase the 70,000,000 allocation to the DAO / JUP Stakers with 40,000,000 JUP to a total of 110,000,000 JUP.
That would make it 70M + 40M = 110 Million JUP in my proposal going to JUP Stakers. This would instead of the previous 15,9% bonus or 159 JUP per 1000 JUP staked, become 25% bonus for JUP stakers or 250 JUP per 1000 JUP staked. It could be based on the snapshot date or an average of several snapshots over the last 12 months.
$100+ tier
You could also get the 40M from 4 other tiers at 10M less each, totalling 40M.
You could for example also remove the 40M JUP allocation to all 3,885,443 users with $100+ volume and stick only with the 2,302,243 users in the 5 tiers (starting at $1K - $10K and ending at $10 Million+). A decent amount of people might be in support of that, from what I’ve seen in the comments and other proposals.
That would exclude 1,583,200 users with $100 - $999,99 in trading volume, which might have a lot of legitimate users who are just starting out, who are less active or who live in less wealthy countries.
I do think it would be fair to allocate just 10 JUP each to the 1,583,200 users with $100 - $1000 volume, but it’s up for debate. There are a lot of options and I’m not claiming my proposal is perfect.
Jupiter Perpetuals
Maybe it’s a good idea to allocate a bit more than 20M JUP to the 233,803 Jupiter perps traders. They pay the highest fees of any of the Jupiter features, and it represents a significant revenue source for Jupiter which we might want to encourage. The perps volume with leverage is $129,447,941,023 (129B). That’s 38% of the total $340,748,185,159 (340B) in volume.
Some details may depend on the team as they have the most authority, experience and insight into the specifics in my opinion. I do think something close to this proposal would be ideal, but I also challenge anyone to argue that.
I was thinking if there could be few options for the claim. I don’t know how long the claim period for J1 was but let’s call it 3 months. During this 3 months people would have option to instantly claim, lock till end of Q2 or till end of Q3. Instant claim would receive 80% of the tokens and the rest would be added to this separate lock pool. Claiming end of Q2 would give 90% and end of Q3 100%. People could use this locked JUP to vote on proposals and receive ASR.
This would encourage people to jump into DAO and decentralise it further, decrease any potential price impact of jupuary supply release and also reward people who decided to lock their jupuary airdrop and be long term JUP holders.
This would require some efforts from the team to build the UI or modify existing ones (for example adding the claim in the same place where voting is) but I don’t see it adding unnecessary complexity for people who are receiving the airdrop. They would just get an alternative if they want to claim it right away or keep it locked and vote with it.
Cool idea! I also like the application you’re suggesting and the percentages of 80%, 90% and 100% are also reasonable. I would suggest end of Q1 and Q2 instead.
This would indeed require quite some coding and small UI addition. It will be up to the team if they like the idea and find it worth putting resources and time into.
More simplified option to implement might even be two options; 1. Get 100% as staked JUP into the DAO with the regular 1 month unstaking time like the current DAO system, or option 2. claim 90% instantly. Could also make a percentage scrolling bar or open field to indicate how much you want to stake and/or claim.
That would be a great way to usher new users into the DAO (and dilute ASR 
).
PS: Jupuary round 1 had a 6 month claim period actually until the middle of 2024.
Question: Does anyone know how many stakers there are with 50+ or 100+ JUP staked?
I wasn’t able to find or filter out this data yet, but I’m sure it’s available somewhere. Thanks!
This would be much easier to apply for sure and even more simple to understand for a user and drive more users in to voting / decision making. Sure it would dilute ASR little more but the golden times of ASR are over anyway.
I hope the team catches this one.
Love you too.
I asked Jazy the same question but out of interest how much are you staking?
Also I can’t lie, I do think calling “multi-wallet” a sybil is incredibly dumb. Even for security reasons alone most people should have 5-10 wallets if they’re dealing with 6-7 figs from my perspective. Does this benefit farming activities too? Sure, but it isn’t comparable to sybiling.
Also in terms of my Twitter claims I’ve basically said the same think ad-nauseum for like a year, I think linear drops generally lead to horrible community sentiment, bad token prices and rewards that aren’t meaningful for 99.9% of users.
I’ve also said repeatedly I will support projects (like Jupiter with the first drop) that allocate with a heavily decentralized approach and tiers, or even L0 and Zksync that had a linear component with reasonable caps. Both of these projects I “farmed”, albeit I still heavily support each publicly whenever I can, continue to only use L0 for bridging and keep most of my Eth liquidity on Zksync.
If a project doesn’t do this or takes the linear approach for stakers rather than a decentralized USER focus, I would boycott and advocate as much publicly as well. Not a secret I’ve said this a million times.
There’s a balance to be had here but never in a million years would I continue to use or support the project (I’d critique the hell out of it everywhere I go actually) if they cancelled Jupuary entirely or made it ASR 2.0. Doesn’t mean it can’t have a heavy stake component, and even a linear stake components. But if that was say 60% of the allocation and it was entirely linear, you better believe I would never support the project again.
And the reality is the upper middle class user does matter, this is the industry of networks and community sentiment matters. “Community” isn’t simply 50-100 whales at the top of the stake ladder.
I agree with the amount of wallets. I have more than one as well. I’m in the 0,1% so I have skin in the game and probably too much because I’m here debating about how jupuary should be allocated instead of having a good night sleep. I wish I had more wallets but I never bothered farming Jupiter. Maybe next time, who knows. Now time for some rest. 
I don’t consider a few wallets to be sybilling as well. I have a couple (which is reasonable for my small portfolio) and it would be indeed disasterous from a security standpoint to only use one. Now regarding the second round of Jup, I didn’t qualify for the first one, as I was heavily into EVM until early 2024, but I’ve been using Solana and Jupiter more frequently (especially during the Sanctum S1 campaign) and I currently have most of my solana converted into JupSOL (besides staking a resonable amount of JUP). I didn’t know there was a second round of Jup airdrop, but I hope that they will consider small users like myself who have been using Jup organically.
The sub < $100 wallets consist mainly of wallets doing the below type of transactions on memecoins. These are bots performing $0,01 transactions from newly created wallets to increase the TX Count and Maker Count, in order to make the memecoin trending on DexScreener and similar platforms.
This provides a clear reason to exclude the 11,361,557 wallets with < $100 volume from any airdrop. These millions of bot wallets don’t merit (deserve) any allocation.
