TL;DR
Make a splash by being the first MM platform to share a percent of platform fees in USDC for staking. For traders it acts like a discount on fees, and for passive stakers it’s a cash return. F the lawyers. This provides something innovative compared with other AMM’s, connects trading volume to rewards, and removes downward price pressure.
Details
Meteora vaulted to top 3 AMM status because LP’s made money using DLMM. It was less because of the points program! We must keep this learning front and center.
We know from early “massive 10% stimmy” discussions with larger MM’s that they discount the future value of platform tokens 90 percent. This means whales cash out (no offense whales) and give nearly zero future value to token rewards. I also think staff will be hurt by the 20% Liquidity Reserve proposal in all honesty.
Make the payments quarterly, so Meteora will gain interest on float for up to 90 days prior to distribution. I could be talked into monthly, but some interest rate float.
If fees are collected in SOL, use an appropriate price smoother for USDC exchange rate
Define a percent of platform fee revenue to use for cash rewards to stakers, similar to a dividend but flexible. The defined percent likely matches anything allocated for buybacks.
Nice to have: user option of cash OR reinvested MET for accounting flexibility.
Conclusion
Out of respect for staff lockups (i.e. motivation), MET must have multiple sources of value. A high market cap supported by sources of intrinsic token value is also critical for future business transactions. Ben used to joke about wanting MET to be a meme. He meant we should avoid anchoring the market cap to something like revenue or book value, not that MET should have zero value besides as a meme. But repeating the mistakes of SUSHI, SBR or MER inflationary rewards is a bad idea.
Ideally we can use Meteora Vaults in the cash reward and claim mechanism, to improve platform Defi metrics and as an interest earning place to hold rewards generated by staking. A cool option for anyone who has reached a vesting milestone would be to allow them to compound staking rewards for their vested portion, until their unlock.
One more thing: part of the reason JTO and HYPE were so powerful for their respective platforms was because they gave generously, early. I don’t have a problem with a supply of unallocated treasury tokens but if the goal is wide distribution then solve it by dropping tokens at TGE to create a legendary wealth effect rather than dribble them over time for years of downward price pressure.
1 -Everyone who has “x” $MET tokens is whitelisted to a project that is launching on Meteora.
This has been a success strategy in the past on other launchpads.
2 - Everyone who stakes $MET can earn platform fees.
**
As of July, Hyperliquid’s AssistanceFund now holds 26.5MM HYPE around for a profit of $789,000,000 and NAV of $1,222,222,222, mainly due to hype’s increase in value as well as a incredibly talented internal HFT team.
I propose that Meteora establish an assistance fund, having trusted third party trading desks manage LP positions and strategies, where profits buyback $MET.
Positions do not need to be transparent for trading efficiency purposes, but performance should be transparent for the community to review. If performance is subpar after 30 days of sustained drawdowns, governance can delegate the treasury to a new partner.
The partner must have certain guarantees to take manage the fund with counterparty risk management built in such as stop losses, insurance, and Doxed team.
airdrop and add lp for unlock. in my opinion, it will probably be airdropped by points. tge will receive 30% and lock 70%. users will have to maintain activity (earn fees and points) with milestones to unlock the remaining tokens. this way, it will keep users. and maintain money in meteora. and reduce selling pressure when tge
Rev-share for stakers (if DefiTuna can offer this, why can’t Meteora)
Voting Rewards for stakers that actually vote (no abstain votes)
Fee Discount for stakers
not against working groups, but will Meteora even need working groups like Jupiter? they have also been such a sore spot for Jupiter causing a lot of unnecessary fud. If they are needed maybe the decision should be left to the team and not put up for a governance vote.
With all the talk of TGE, I find myself thinking about what we could do with MET.
I believe there is a unique opportunity in utilizing existing technology and services surrounding the Meteora ecosystem to drive demand for MET that would be totally novel and only really possible here. These are very off the cuff idea’s I’ve had rattling around in my head - hopefully they spark something interesting!
1. Market maker AI Agents as a Service for new launches:
Provide teams that launch on Meteora the option to deploy AI-powered agents that actively manage a DLMM pool funded with a portion of their supply or a pre-sale amount raised from the community.
It would require the project to buy MET to spin them up and a cut of the agent’s fees is programmed to swap into MET, and burn it. You could also give the project an option for it to auto-burn some of it’s supply too - or auto deposit it as locked liquidity in their DAMMv2 pool.
Over time, these agents would just churn away generating fees and providing a deflationary effect on both the project and MET overall.
2. Performance-Based Copy Trading
Build a native leaderboard of high-performing LPs — with copy functionality gated behind a MET-denominated fee or subscription.
Copiers pay MET to sub. LPs earn a portion of copiers fees as MET. Meteora takes a cut — and burns part of it.
Turn LP-ing into social trading. Introduce follower caps where higher amounts of staked or paid MET, or even an auction of MET is required to obtain one of a limited number of followers allowed per wallet. The follower scarcity mechanic would also help distribute copy traders to many different wallets, mitigating the cascading “sell all” effect caused when one LP is being heavily copied while also distributing the earning opportunity amongst many good manual LPs vs concentrating into just a few high performing ones.
3. On-chain Reputation Layer (Soulbound Badges) for the LP Army
The LP Army is very strong community but does not have a unified identity (yet!). Rather than minting a traditional NFT pfp project, create a reputation layer that users can dress their PFP that is based on achievement/LP Ability and commitment to MET.
Track LP XP by wallet(s)— volume, days active, win rate, volatility risk, etc.
Let users mint soulbound traits for milestones (e.g. “50 profitable LP sessions”, “Top 10 PnL for the week”, “over 150% profit in a single position”).
Gate access to copy tools, vaults, discord channels or governance proposals based on this XP/NFT.
MET stake boosts XP gain — or a flat fee in MET is required to mint/activate or update the PFP. Achievements and XP are rewarded through some multiplier for the next points season.
4. Bribery Markets for Bin Array Creation
Offer rewards in the form of MET to wallets that pay the bin array creation costs for bins in pools that are then USED over a certain threshold (it executes a number of swaps/earns a number of fees etc).
This helps sustain liquidity even in weird or thin areas of a chart.
**4. MET reward boosts to incentivize effective pools - directed by the LP Army.
**
Use short-lived fee multipliers or boosts (in MET) for pools that have a strong probability of being able to out-perform competing DEXs but are lacking TVL.
For example, if there is a lot of TVL in a 100bin step 2% pool but a different DEX is catching far more volume than Meteora, A boost could be deployed in the 20 bin 0.2% fee pool to encourage TVL to move to a more efficient pool.
Some kind of social voting system could be deployed to control this - where if enough of the LP Army nominate a pool, it gets boosted and the boost is announced in the UI of all the other DLMMs for that pair.
Right now, we have a large LP Army but they are quite uncoordinated in battle, they need signals and direction (forgive the metaphor!)
5. Predict-to-Earn LP Ranges
A side game where the LP Army place predictions (in MET) on where a pair’s price will range over a fixed time or at what price will a TGE start trading at.
If their prediction overlaps with the actual highest-yield bin range:
They get a share of the pool + bonus MET
Wrong predictions → part of the MET burned
This could slot into the gamified “LP Arena” category as a lightweight, prediction-market twist. Newer LP’s can polish their skills with this too.
6.Beginner Booster Pack
A program where experienced LPs allocate idle capital to mirror a beginner’s trades through a copy bot. The bot uses strict stop-losses to protect the pro’s capital but no take-profit limits, allowing beginners to capture amplified wins. Profits are split between the beginner (to speed up compounding), the pro LP (as a return on capital), and the protocol.
The system is fully on-chain and rules-enforced, with capital in segregated vaults. Beginners can’t directly touch the pro’s funds, but their LP actions influence the mirrored capital. This aligns incentives: beginners grow faster, pros earn without extra work, and Meteora gets more engaged users and volume.
MET Integration:
Stake-to-access: Beginners and pros stake MET to join.
Immediately post TGE, integrate and allow the use of $MET as collateral on the new Jupiter Lend platform. This would decrease initial sell side pressure and generally speaking be a great option which many investors would appreciate. Also good for both platforms.
Little bribery for creation of efficient pools is the goat idea imo. Imagine how much we lose just because people create 20/0.2% pools on super inefficient memecoins or vice versa. The cost of paying for an individual is too high. If enough incentives are provided, Met could earn more fees from less volume, even if in short term. It adds up
No. This is the logical endgame as more people use the Meteora tools. The margins shrink. The ecosystem gets better, mature & saturated though. What you are suggesting is that you want the trader to get the short end of the stick on purpose by discouraging reasonable pool creation. That’s not a good user experience for the macro eco system. Lower fees = goal beyond our greed. I know everything is always PvP but let’s keep the greed less unhinged.
I think a good use for $MET is to be able to stake it to different LP of your choice with different Lock-up peroids. If you stake to a certain pool you get % of fees from that pool. Additionally if you add your own LP, this fee amount can be boosted.
No. That’s not what we’re saying at all. In fact, we’re trying to encourage reasonable pool creation and then help nudge TVL into those pools.
We can not force unhinged greed because the Metis Router routes trades based on price, slippage, and quoted-to-executed price across multiple DEXes.
Many of the LP Army aggressively undercut fees to compete with Raydium and Pumpswap, because they focus only on fees and ignoring slippage (e.g. 20 0.2 strat). That’s unfortunate, because DLMM’s strength is precision—surgical liquidity, not just cheap trades.
Raydium and Pumpswap both charge 0.25% and dominate in swap volume.
To compete, DLMM pools must offer better slippage or lower fees—ideally both. But right now, some LPs are overcompensating with 20-bin 0.2% fee pools, when that’s unnecessary due to the recent update allowing new bin step to fee options. A 20-bin pool already offers significantly better slippage, so even a 1% (maybe even 2%) fee could outperform those AMMs. Even a 50 1% probably does as well.
If we design pools that are both competitive and profitable, traders get a better experience (less slippage), TVL follows, and Meteora captures more volume without needing to race to the bottom.
That makes sense. However, how different users choose to provide liquidity should not be penalized. That was my main gripe. Beyond that I am neutral on this topic. Both pools can exist. If someone thinks the 0.2% pool is flawed, that person can set up the superior pool. Vice versa. People don’t wake up and create a 0.2% for no reason. And I do think that overall, the pool landscape is pretty diverse. Anyways, as this an broad ideas thread, let’s not get too off topic to keep the overview. But thank you for clarifying!
There is no penalizing at all. The idea is to help users unite, create pools and avoid putting all the costs on single individuals to create better pools
There are some good ones here! Enjoy reading all of these over and thinking about all the possibilities that are yet to come. The future is bright for the LP Army
