Proposal 001 - LQ Token Distribution Update

You bring up multiple compelling points we did not fully consider at the time of writing this proposal, mostly due to the fact that SS was the only live AMM DEX at the time. With the super successful launch of Minswap we recognize this strategy of DEX selection must be entirely reconsidered, perhaps as its own individual proposal.

The bonding program is a very interesting idea to grow the DAO Treasury’s balance sheet beyond LQ tokens which I am personally a huge fan of, even if it means a short term selling pressure it also means as you explained the ability for the protocol to own assets (and earn the fees from the LP tokens).

My main response to this take is how the community will decide 1. the number of DEXs to include in this liquidity program and 2. the threshold/metrics used to objectively analyze each DEX. These are both open questions but it’s up to the community to decide calculated frameworks for both of these.


i just note that for proposal 1, that the LIQWID ownership is at 25%, whereas for Cardano on mainnet was about 16%, MINSWAP team ownership at 10%.
I am a latecomer onto Liqwid with LP farms on Sundaeswap before and now moved to MINSWAP.

25% team ownership is high, like those VC sponsored projects on Polkadot, they are all travelling on 25% team, x% advisors, X% for seed investors, X% for ecosystem, etc.

I just heard on update #9 that this is not locked in stone and can be changed before launch.


As a comparison with MINSWAP tokenomics…
10% core team
10% Dev fund
1.5% incentives /Partnership
6% DAO Treasury
2.5% FISO Airdrop
70% Yield Farming

“Core Team + Dev Team” = 20% for the Team at Minswap. At LQ, under Core Team, we include the Dev Team into it (total 25%). Thus, comparing a DEX with a lending & borrowing app is not exactly the same. Finally, Liqwid is giving 75% to the community, which none in our field has done.

Also, @YouIyouAda this platform is not a place to lobby Minswap.


UPVOTE this I agree… and more on the way

1 Like

I would have liked the 3 year release schedule to be lengthened to reduce the dilution of LQ.

I think at this point we can see more or less which dexes have a long-term view, Wingriders looks like a good prospect as well. The community is just waiting on Maladex.


Yes I agree, I think as mentioned above a set of metrics (TVL, 24hr volume, users, etc) must be used to measure each DEX on an objective basis. Especially as more DEXs (Genius Yield, Maladex) come online it makes sense we setup this framework now. A dynamic rewards model including a multiplier that rebalances (similar to the Minswap rewards system) would be a strong fit for this.

1 Like