I fully agree with that. Just like he used deduplication and eliminated people with under 100$ volume, I think we should eliminate people that might have 15k$ volume but less than X txs done on JUP (not sure how many). Otherwise nothing would stop a whale from farming hundreds of wallets by using the same 15k$ and rotating them from wallet to wallet.
I’d like to see the proposal done by @JUPWhale but with only wallets that made lets say at least 5 or 10 txs using JUP (just to avoid those one time tx wallets with big volume)
4 Likes
45% APY is not the real number because the amount of staked JUP doesn’t remain the same for the whole year. I’ve written a post about ASR, which gives a more realistic view what the actual reward can look like.
Another thing to note is that to achieve this 20-25% APY, you have to keep your JUP locked for the whole year, keep all the ASR you receive locked for the whole year and not miss a single vote for the whole year. Unstaking some or missing a vote would considerably decrease the APY, especially if this would happen early in the year.
The real APY is closer to 20-25% for the whole year of 2025.
4 Likes
Thank you @SolSixties!
And agreed, several others like @miuq have also suggested this. I will change this in the proposal to make the airdrop based on amount voted instead of amount staked.
Update: I have included this in the proposal as follows:
3 Likes
This is not really an issue anymore in Jupuary round #2 vs Jupuary round #1 because the potential airdrop amount per user decreased significantly up to ~ 50X. For example:
In my proposal a whale making $1M - $10M in transaction volume would gets only around ~ 2,200 JUP airdrop (in Jupuary round #1 this was 100,200 JUP!).
- $1M - $10M tier: 70M JUP / 31,920 users = 2,193 JUP per user
To generate $1M in transaction volume it costs around $250 - $1000+, and to generate $10M in transaction volume it would cost $2,500 - $10,000+.
The precise number depends mainly on the asset, the liquidity size, the transaction volume, the slippage and the sizing and the timing of the transaction.
Applying an advanced transaction multiplier to ~ 2.2 Million / 3.4 Million wallets to calculate precisely weighted allocations would be very complex and require substantial math and computing power.
The team has said they will apply deduplication, but Meow also said multiple times they want to keep the criteria and rules for Jupuary easy to implement and understand with little complex math.
That’s why volume-based requirements make most sense. The $100+ requirement filters out 11,361,557 wallets. Making many transactions doesn’t cost much, but making big transactions costs a lot.
1 Like
I would have no issue starting at the $1000+ tier. I mainly included the $100 - $1000 tier with a small allocation of just 40M / 10 JUP per user because it seems fair and inclusive, and I know that Meow wants the airdrop to be inclusive as possible. Meow wrote the round #1 airdrop announcement:
1 Like
so the intention wasnt to keep it locked for the whole year? just milking it as long as it can provide. the math above describes substantial dedicated stakers, dragging stakers at every aspects will eventually get more diluted in governance considering the amount of increase in those numbers, thats easy farmable, requires less attention and talking of votes if a legend staked a specific amount and so for what he staked? to vote precisely right.
its cool to innovate more new users participate by rewarding a portion of staked jup so to realize thats its passive income generator works perfect. so at the end of the day he will add up more.
and thaks joe jazy for ratioing the conversation through your precious likes, really appreciate it.
1 Like
I appreciate the analysis but there are couple of flaws. Many of those whales would be farmers. The uptick in users could also be due to bots. Last JUP someone used a bot to do trades on 1000 wallets and got a minimum of 200 JUP on each wallet. So you haven’t accounted for what may be organic vs bot. Also, another flaw is that you did not mention the heard mentality phenomenon. The price will dump because people are expecting it to dump, whether the airdrop is broadly distributed or not. So to say the fear of a price drop is unfounded isn’t correct. The price drop can’t be avoided so this shouldn’t be the focus. JUP should go into the hands of those are actively building and participating in the JUP Ecosystem.
1 Like
I have to apologise but I don’t really understand what you mean here. I’ll do my best to reply anyway.
I think it’s up to the person which way he wants to do it. The longer you lock the more compounding you get but it’s also an option to unstake at any point, with the 30 day rule.
This is mainly what I didn’t understand. Would you elaborate?
1 Like
@JUPWhale I’ll answer you here regarding your comment on this post.
Sure thing, the APY was indeed higher than 45%.
But if we take this into consideration, wouldn’t it then be fair to also consider all those who received jupuary #1? Lots of people got 1k-100k JUP and even more got 200-1k? How about the pool of traders (5-10%) who are profitable and are using Jupiter swap? Or the working groups and others who have been compensated for their community contributions? How about JLP holders?
If we let the APY of voters become a factor on jupuary allocation, wouldn’t it also be fair to introduce deductions for the groups mentioned above?
2 Likes
What you’re claiming is not correct. There is no allocation for farmers in this proposal.
Most of the 11,361,557 users are assumed to be irrelevant wallets / farmers or bots wallets.
Further deduplication and anti-sybil has to be performed through blockchain analysis.
Blockchain analysis software with AI can easily find and exclude bot and farming behaviour and differentiate it from organic trading activity.
You do not have to exclude genuine traders to deduplicate.
Many are not expecting the JUP price to drop. My analysis shows that it will likely have a very small impact on the JUP price, because a lot of people are not selling their airdrop.
The airdrop amounts are also 10X - 50X smaller than last year, so this round #2 can’t be compared to round #1. That having said, JUP did well after the airdrop of round #1, and is a $1B+ token, so from experience we can deduce it will be alright with JUP.
Those were all with low transaction volume and they wouldn’t get an airdrop this round per my proposal.
That is exactly what would be accomplished with this proposal.
1 Like
yeah would loved to no offense, APY itself means ‘annual percentage yield’ anymore on this i think google can help you in detailed, ok so far assuming you got this point, glad.
and look i dont claim stakers are evils here, myself i belong to the same list but what im against is of tops getting unnecessary benefits, 1m bagging 1m as 100% APY with 10m and 5m respectively which was requested before interms of securities for further increase in supply and price impact, sorry if your in those numbers you would definitely defend by any means, i can hardly believe cuz a person playing in that substantial numbers wouldnt care to contribute to a pro longed disagreement, infact wouldnt be here, probably chilling in hawaii anyway this is out of the topic, i thought to expand it more.
prioritizing stakers is not the ideal choice, yes im not against including a portion with all other features jup provides along with products marks a primary revenue generator, after all this revenue can make huge and improvision to the product this is long term game, right? correct me if im wrong.
thanks lol im not dishearten person but anyway we can debate as long as we can, make it controversial but anything we suggest here is opinion, i personally think teams are more into it deciding the future of project and would not disappoint anyone as long as ive read meows lengthy post or essays, everyone here are for profits ikr.
1 Like
Excellent analysis @JUPWhale.
The JUP ecosystem has built and is still building an extraordinary product and has seen a massive growth in community participation “Jup is all about community “
People use Jup for a lot of reasons; most just for farming the airdrop but just like the last line “No cats should be left out, except nothing, be thankful for everything”
Airdrop is a gift don’t make sense with vesting and locking
Some people will sell; but some will also hold
It just takes a strong will of belief and conviction on Jup
A community that believes in what they are building will always win
2 Likes
I think only those users shold receive drop, who staking jup and vote, not all 15M users
1 Like
Ok I understand now. I mean it’s true that if you’ve staked 1M from the beginning of ASR, you’ve got a lot on top of your existing 1M. I can also understand why it bothers many people. I think some whales have actually split their JUP into separate wallets as some want to be “under the radar” and some also speculate that if jupuary rewards voters, it may be tiered.
We may have different opinions if those big voters should be rewarded like that or not, but as you said, these are just personal opinions and your opinion is not any worse than mine. 
1 Like
Looks like everyone preparing criteria suitable exclusively for himself
1 Like
You’re right, it’s my business and as a staker I have every right to have my opinion and also to vote how I see fit. It sounds like you have an entitlement issue because if the airdrop was guaranteed like you claimed then we wouldn’t have a vote on it but you seem to think that previous comments automatically guarantee you some $JUP.
What you see as negative comments is actually just good business sense. What happens when a company dilutes their stock by creating new shares? The price goes down obviously and smart money sells their shares before hand and if they believe in the product then they buy back in at a lower price and make money and gain more control off of the sell pressure that can’t be absorbed.
So you can think any way you want about it but I’m looking out for my bag regardless of what anyone else does because unlike whales and farmers that positioned themselves to soak up the majority of another airdrop, little people will be the ones screwed as always.
1 Like
Thanks for the welcome, I’ve been watching the discussions for months but this was the first time I felt it important enough to log in and comment. I’ve voted on all but 2 gov proposals, 2 of the LFG votes I missed.
The tokenomics are fluid, the airdrops aren’t guarenteed which is why we have to vote on them, the burn wasn’t guarenteed, continuing the ASR for another year wasn’t guarenteed, nothing is set in stone and it all requires a vote. So the
[quote=“aped, post:273, topic:26133”]
whole tokenomics the way it was designed proportionally
[/quote] was basically a draft proposal and in no way means we have to do it that way.
My fear, aside from dumping, is that any proposal for an airdrop allocation that passes will almost surely benefit the whales and farmers disproportionately. They’re not going to use their massive amounts of votes to vote for something they lose money on which makes me very suspicious of anyone that so forcefully demands an airdrop as a holder. We already know non holders are like this because they feel entitled, they’ve farmed the shit out of it with wash transactions for months in order to get a huge bag they can dump on us holders, the only reason a whale would also be so adamant about it is if they stand to gain a lot more than they’ll lose from the price dump.
The only way I’d be alright with another airdrop is if quadratic allocations were in play, low maximum allocations per wallet were enforced, sybil checks and bans were enforced, a very long vesting period of like 1 year were enacted, and possibly 50% or more is burned so at least 50% will benefit everyone equally.
This will never happen because it makes sense, doesn’t overly favor whales, and sybil farmers don’t profit.
1 Like
I like to think most users didn’t claim for the fear of getting hacked from connecting wallet; or the didn’t know they got the JUP allocation
But the $ Jup ecosystem has seen a massive increase and every one is more away of what they are building
2 Likes
" The thing I disagree with is the need or entitlement for more than 10% allocation."
At the same time you want 70M tokens for “contributors”. What’s that? Few hundreds of users, for sure under 1k. How much did you generated in fees this year?
110M for traders with over 1M in volume and, 70M for users that are posting on social media?
Perps are the backbone of the exchange dude, any exchange.
You want tens of thousands JUP for posting on social media, while you propose 2k for the fee generators?
Get real dude
2 Likes
Normally yes, you’re making a good point.
But there is some nuance here because Jupuary round #1 was for the period of pre-Nov 2022 until Nov 2023. The people who received allocation for round #1 received it for that period. They got crazy airdrop amounts and got lucky / were the first movers. Past allocation of the period before Nov 2023 shouldn’t affect allocation of the period after Nov 2023.
ASR came from the unclaimed 215B JUP from round #1, which is part of the broader community distribution of JUP (of which 2.1B remaining after the burn). JLP earnings on the other hand don’t come from a JUP token supply allocation, but from actual profits in return for providing liquidity to the 850M pool to enable perps trading.
JLP holders have less allocation in my proposal than JUP Stakers with 20M and 70M respectively, but JLP and JUP are also included in the New Features and New Token users, with 70M extra allocation for the total amount of this category.
2 Likes