Meteora is stirring up the Solana community with its controversial proposals. By assigning 3% of the TGE fund to Jup Stakers, it’s a liquidity NFTS rather than a regular token.
This new approach promises to bootstrap Met’s deep liquidity from day one, but raises questions about fairness and concentration risk. Will this be a savvy move to bridge the two communities, or will it ignite a long-term debate?
Jup Staker 3% Allocation
As reported by Beincrypto, Meteora is preparing for TGE in October. The platform has brought one of the community’s most notable suggestions ahead of Met’s TGE.
Sponsored Sponsors
Under the plan, the project will allocate 3% of the TGE fund to Jupiter’s Jup Stakers as liquidity NFTs. Specifically, Meteora uses 3% to seed MET liquidity in a single-sided DAMM V2 pool and assign positions to Jupiter stakers based on time-weighted staking, volume and voting activity.
The goal is to create Met/USDC fluidity in the list without immediately adding Met to the circulating power source. The proposal also emphasizes that “the proposal will not add any additional tokens.” This is a “liquidity-first” approach, rather than direct token payments.
Meteora’s co-lead Soju has published public calculations to visualize the scale. According to Soju, around 600 million Jups are currently staining the piles. The 3% allocation equals 30 million Met tokens. That’s about 0.05 Met per Staked Jup.
“I think that’s reasonable,” Seo-ju shared.
X users performed some napkin maths and created similar numbers for ~0.05035 Met/JUP, depending on the FDV assumption. Although the reward per jap is small, it is concentrated on a large scale and serves as a meaningful incentive to convert users into MET liquidity providers.
Pros and Cons
Meteora’s proposal has a clear advantage over other projects that reward users via AirDrops. It explicitly recognizes Jupiter’s role in the Solana Ecosystem, supports Bootstrap Met/USDC liquidity in TGE, and reduces immediate selling pressure as the initial reward is a liquidity position rather than a free-to-tradeable token. Careful engineering (time-weighted distribution, vesting associated with NFTs, withdrawal restrictions) could make this an effective bridge between the two communities.
However, there are still significant risks. The community raised concerns about equity: Why should Jup Stakers receive a large share? Can a “LP army” or a large wallet earn an unbalanced share of rewards? What will the circulation supply be with TGE soon? Previous allocation drafts, where up to 25% is reserved for liquidity/TGE reserve, total circulation supply remains a matter of material transparency.
“When Jup gives up 5% on Meteora (via Mercurial Stakeholders), it’s difficult to discuss ‘fairness’. The LP Army is worth more -> The LP Army has acquired a significant portion of all future emissions (ongoing LM rewards), and is still Tge not of on soju at 20% (8% + 5% + 2% + 3% + 2%).
From past airdrop events, Meteora teams should be transparent about Toconemics, clearly disclose LP NFT Redeem/Vest Mechanics, set caps per address ring, and consider additional incentives for Met Holder. If performed poorly, concentrated distribution and subsequent sales pressures can erode the value of TGE.
