Thank you. I agree with you on the difficulty of finding a balance between all elements, given that each one has its distinct emphasis. My proposal does not aim to alter the existing framework for Established Projects, which relies heavily on LFHFDV and substantial VC funding.
Instead, it opens a door for smaller, Establishing Projects, to potentially make their debut via the LFG Launchpad. In doing so, we maintain the substantial trading volume from these large-scale projects, while successfully introducing additional volume from this emerging category. Simultaneously, this will assist these founders and yield more benefits for our community, such as a higher allocation for ASR rewards.
As outlined in the proposal, the LFHFDV model has not demonstrated satisfactory performance in the medium to long term (as discussed in Item 3). This has become a significant concern within our community. Following Binance’s shifted focus towards small to medium capitalization projects (Item 5.2), there’s an emerging concern that the volume of LFHFDV projects might decrease. This is mainly due to the understanding within the community that the R:R for trading these tokens might be too low compared with other options. Such a scenario significantly affects Jupiter/Meteora, underlining the importance of this proposal imho.
I think there’s room to fine-tune this proposal. However, I think it already presents numerous advantages for all parties involved, without affecting the major projects currently competing on LFG Launchpad.
I find it interesting that we (the crypto community) like to highlight how superior we are to web2 equivalents, yet most of our systems are direct copies of those same corporate structures. VCs are just the next step to the evolution from DeFi back into TradFi.
The variety of both financial and governance structures in crypto are limited only by it’s creator’s abilities. Yet we are constantly looking backwards…as if for approval.
I say let Blackrock buy into the Alpha Vault if they want in. No need to sell our souls.
I, of course, support this proposal.
J4J
While this does make a lot of sense, there’s an argument to be made for a lighter touch model wherein rather than creating a new category, smaller tweaks can be made to the existing system one by one.
I am a relative Solana noob (invested in SOL ages ago, but only now building on Solana). This article, and indeed this forum, already shows that I landed in the right ecosystem. We are looking to launch MVP on Solana by end of this year (re-writing our existing protocol from EVM) and we are considering tokenomics. We want to find the sweetspot between LFHFDV and 100% fair launch. We have to be realistic about demands from VC but at the same time we will be living much happier with an upward trend in our token post-TGE. The question is, who do we talk to with regard to launching on LFG in the most community-benefiting manner. Are there LFG team members on this chat? My TG is @manurens73