I agree with you on pretty much all these points. Perhaps it’s coming across that we’re not thinking about LM programs, or that we’re being too conservative to our detriment, and that may even be correct! I’m glad you’ve brought up the discussion!
I want to iterate that we’re very much R&D’ing our LM program & incentives structure. It takes time to get right, we want the right feedback loops in place to make it sustainable, and we want it to be equitable to all users, not just large whales and funds that can park size and extract a lot of value.
Why are we moving slower? For one, the tech takes time to build and test. We made the conscious and strategic choice to open source our code, so we spend a lot of time making sure we get the code right before releasing. I bring this up because part of our LM strategy is to potentially use it to bootstrap things the protocol needs, with the primary need being an insurance fund, basically a junior tranche in place to protect against adverse events. Second order of importance is having the LM funds to pilot new lending products.
The pooled lending model has gotten DeFi really far, it’s also insanely saturated market on Solana right now, but more importantly it’s evident that users are finding they have nuanced lending needs (NFTs, unsecured, fixed term/rate, and so on…) that are largely unaccounted for across most L1s. And we’re putting a ton of engineering effort into these areas (on the Solana side ofc) with more info coming quite soon.
I’ve diverged a little from the topic, but I think it’s important to highlight as we’ve a holistic view of our LM program. We want there to be utility in place for the tokens our LPs receive before we kick off the program, and we want tokenholders to derive clear benefit from it.
For example, potential options available to LPs claiming their JET rewards:
- stake accrued rewards for x, y, z benefits,
- multiply your voting power relative to staking time period selected,
- stake / deposit and borrow against your JET,
- and of course, users are naturally free to sell pending an unlock, if there is one
All this introduces optionality, users can structure their token utility on JET in ways that benefits their operational needs best. Lastly, we think this creates a more sticky userbase, and it seems with the competition in the market this is becoming of paramount importance.
To recap, we’re definitely working on our LM program & staking economics, and are designing and implementing the program tech to facilitate it. And I’d like to echo what @jrmoreau said, the JET will flow.
Given all this, would be great to hear your feedback on the specifics I outlined above.