Proposal: Spreading the 75% Reduction Out Daily & Reducing Sell Spikes

[MegaB1973]

@lochie2001

I think that those who are financially driven forget. By the time jupuary happens c jup will be like $4 man

I swear .

We can dream Lochie!

[lochie2001]

Manifest it! We are close to this than we are further

[MegaB1973]

I’m certainly not selling before $4 - got those losses to try and recoup remember

3x by February airdrop would be hella sexy!

[JUPWhale]

@meow you shared on Discord to be considering a ‘‘straight one year lock’’, but this would cause a huge tsunami sell wave 1 year from now when many (not all) Staked JUP would reasonably unlock.

This above proposal is a way to prevent it and to properly and sustainable manage sell-side liquidity. Hope you can consider it.

Proposal: Spreading the 75% Reduction Out Daily & Reducing Sell Spikes

Proposal: Spreading the 75% Reduction Out Daily & Reducing Sell Spikes Background Meow mentioned in the latest JUP Really that the Jupuary allocation would be staked at first, but that it could be claimed on day 1 at a 75% reduction (25% of the allocation). The reductions would last for one year for direct claim. We understand here that the longer you wait, the less the 75% reduction becomes and the higher % of allocation you get. This would continue throughout the year until it would reach 0%…

[MyFIPath]

I believe for the long term health of the ecosystem you should actually take this a step further out and not focus on the short term. I feel people are afraid to commit long term so the way I would’ve modelled is how stock options are usually awarded at startups:

• Have 1 year cliff where you don’t receive anything
• At the 1 year anniversary get let’s say 25%
• Then either every month/year get a fixed allocation until you get to 100% (for example 25% every subsequent year making this a 4 year vesting schedule)

You can tweak this however you want to get to the right numbers. Given we want to give users some stake right away one example:

• Option 1: Take 25% and that’s it
• Option 2: Take 10% then have a 3 year vesting schedule where after the 1 year cliff you get 30% and then 2.5% every subsequent month for 2 years

This has the pros of evening out the sell pressure but at the same time it’s more focused on the long run. You also achieve the goal of giving users a stake right away.

I think most importantly would be for there to be conditions on the vesting (akin to being employed). So you can make it so that if the user is not staked/voting you stop vesting.

[JUPWhale]

Meow said he wants to make it one year, so I’m aligning with the team’s vision on that.

In theory it could be made longer than 1 year, but the point of the post is to show the many reasons why daily reduction / vesting would be better.

This can be applied to any vesting period, wether it be 1 year or longer.

[MyFIPath]

Better in what criteria? To the user’s receiving their rewards or to JUP?

Spreading it out daily doesn’t mean that much sell pressure difference versus weekly/monthly. You’re also under the assumption that this does create a lot of sell pressure.

You could make the opposite argument and say having the sell pressure once as a shock to the market can lead to a better outcome versus a slowly consistent unlock. Don’t think your argument above indicates (with data) what is better. Showing some code or graph doesn’t mean much when you can spin the analysis both ways.

Long term locking guarantees that we know ahead of time how much JUP there is left. With daily unlocking you don’t know ahead of time when user’s are going to “cash out” making planning harder.

Would generally advocate to keep it simple until we can see data otherwise (the above model doesn’t indicate anything as the assumption is everything is sold).

[Thementalist1]

I think it’s an excellent proposal, yes, hold on Jup since I won my 200 jup. However, it depends. I’ve read other articles, they’ve mentioned 7 jup to 15 for users of 1 to 1k in volume, imagine unlocking 7 or 15 jup in a year. .

[aped]

volume no more would be a priority consistency will be which will eventually weed out vast numbers and those numbers wont look that similar, would be point saying its as a gift.