The Flexa Network subsidy discussed and approved in March 2022 will soon be completed. This proposal is for the Ampera Foundation to continue the distribution of AMP tokens to Flexa Capacity for an additional 12 months. The Ampera Foundation treasury will distribute 1,366,296,000 (1.36 billion) AMP of the approximately 6,000,000,000 (6.0 billion) AMP remaining from the initial Network Development Fund allocation. We propose the 1.36 billion AMP to be distributed according to the schedule shown below. The goal of the proposal is to continue bootstrapping spending capacity for the Flexa Network while further providing tokens to direct users within the Ampera ecosystem. This is important as decentralized, on-chain governance will play a critical role in the Ampera protocol.
Proposed network subsidy distribution (itemized schedule below):
Month 1: 166,000,000
Month 2: 147,400,000
Month 3: 133,450,000
Month 4: 124,150,000
Month 5: 117,175,000
Month 6: 110,665,000
Month 7: 105,085,000
Month 8: 100,435,000
Month 9: 96,250,000
Month 10: 92,344,000
Month 11: 88,531,000
Month 12: 84,811,000
If the proposal is successful, the Ampera Foundation will announce the start of this subsidy with at least 72 hours notice. This will be communicated via the Ampera community Discord. We are seeking community feedback on this initiative prior to creating a formal proposal for Snapshot voting.
To determine if giving 25% of remaining tokens to just one partner for one year is in our best interests as Amp-holders, we will need to know how many of the remaining tokens are controlled by Ampera Foundation and how many are controlled by Flexa Network. If Flexa retained a large number of tokens then they should be subsidizing their own project. If a majority were transferred to Ampera Foundation, then it is appropriate for AF to continue this subsidy. Please provide the updated ownership by custodial addresses so we can make an informed decision. To be clear, I agree with continuing subsidies, but it comes down to whose tokens should be used.
We granted it but didn’t see any new apps or wallets since the grant. Why grant more without seeing any actual real apps or wallets integration?
I concur. We should see an accounting. We should also see an accounting of how those prior efforts have done, and to whom they were issued to.
Is there a reasoning behind the token allocation per month? First month (which I think is April) is the largest and decreases month over month. Is that because you anticipate more transaction volume to supplement it going forward so less subsidy is needed each month?
Whatever happened to the Grant program we voted on 2 years ago?
Can we get some info on what is even going on before we start putting up new proposals…
This is ridiculous.
Question i hope the team could answer.
- How will the potential dilution of token value for current AMP holders be addressed, and what measures will be taken to mitigate any negative impact on the market value of AMP?
- Can you provide details on the fairness and transparency of the proposed token distribution model, and explain how it will encourage network growth .
- What is the rationale for how the continued distribution of tokens will drive adoption of the Flexa Network and Ampera ecosystem, and what metrics will be used to measure this success?
- How will the utility of AMP tokens within the Ampera ecosystem be increased through this additional token distribution, and how will it provide value to users and the ecosystem as a whole?
Given minimal usage on Flexa (as far as at least I am aware), what’s the point of this outside of distributing more tokens that will be inevitably find their way in the order book?
The de-escalating distribution schedule is bizarre by the way. It looks like a simple way to pump up the APY, while distributing tokens faster to do what…sell? Haha.
The proposal needs an actual reason and real information other than leading people to guess intent: my first guess would be the proposal is to provide another year of free liquidity to Flexa. Hell, charge Flexa an interest rate or require them to make open market purchases if they want tokens.
With the information provided, you may as well ask someone walking down the street as to their thoughts.
I don’t understand what good this will do. Are we attempting to reward builders or create partnerships? I’d most likely agree to this with more information.
Is this necessary or can we just allow the current collateral to rise in value for existing holders instead? Maybe we consider this option AFTER we see results? Dilution when we’re at all time lows without more info isn’t ideal. I’m confident in the team and potential but need more crumbs please.
More transparency where possible would be helpful. In the meantime it’s a no from me.
I completely agree with Amplify and their points must be addressed. (Also, Ampera Foundation wallets 100% need to get labeled before making any distributions. They should’ve already been labeled.)
Next, this question must be answered. Why do we feel 1.5 billion AMP over 1 year is necessary when the previous subsidy was 1 billion AMP over 1 year? Has Flexa not made enough progress over the past year? Is there not enough AMP/collateral value in the Flexa Capacity collateral pools, or is there a fear of too much unstaking without the subsidy due to no usage? What’s the reason?
NaijaCrypto makes some great points we need addressed.
Also, as Dranonymous asked, why decrease the amount each month? Is there any true usage confirmed and set to takeover? We need more confirmation and less hope. We’ve been running on hope for too long.
The community has been left in the dark for too long. We need transparency and clarity on many points before moving forward. There are too many open items that haven’t come to light over the last subsidized year.
Let’s get the questions and points here addressed.
I propose we start with a 6 month subsidy then reevaluate. I think we’ll get a better vote on a 6 month subsidy with a midway evaluation.
Many valid points are being addressed. My updated feedback based on evaluating all input is now:
Approve the 1.5B tokens, but allocate in a manner more in line with needs while addressing important feedback issues.
Provide a 8-month wind-down period consisting of 500M tokens that takes us to the end of the year.
MAY: 105M (3.5M tokens per day. Original was 2.5M tokens per day and present 3.75M tokens per day)
I propose approving the remaining 1B tokens to be allocated “as needed” with no set distribution schedule and no set time period. The 1B should last beyond one year and not require yearly renewal. When there are new wallets or apps requiring seeding then the tokens will be ready. Directors, members and executives of Ampera Foundation and Flexa Network shall have the authority to collaborate and authorize the distribution of these 1B tokens to further the objectives in support of the best interests of all Amp holders. The community does not need to micro-manage these individual distributions.
This allows for an orderly process for people to evaluate when staking no longer makes sense to them. It should be noted there was no shortage of stakers at 3M tokens per day and it is likely more than enough to handle actual needs would remain even with no subsidies. By the end of the year we would all hope that actual transaction volume would become more relevant and begin to render subsidies moot.
I still think its crazy they are even putting the distibution out there publicly.
Will never increase in value when people clearly know the subsidy to sell against.
The hope was usage, but it seems Flexa is abandoning the SDK. So why do we even need to keep bootstrapping at all?
Personally, its already tanked, along with my six figs.
I say let it ride without subsidy until they figure out what theyre doing.
At the moment it feels like they dont really even know anymore.
Id love to be wrong and to be told otherwise. If their only response is we are building, than ill accept my fate.
They said they want our feedback. Lets see if they actually listen this time, or blow us off as always.
I am in favor of this.
Staking rewards stay staked, this is the best way to keep that 1.5B from selling.
We should not be asked to approve dilution at this point until it’s clear:
- Flexa SDK is done and released.
- The AMP TOKEN economics are not materially changed now that Flexa is a separate entity from AMP. Including, AMP is the exclusive collateral token of Flexa, the AMP collateral fee is 0.9% and paid by any user of the collateral token via SDKs.
- The AMP white paper is completed.
- Agree with others that if for some reason people think the inflation is good. at least lock up the tokens until the above 3 at a minimum are clear.
The inflated APY is dilutive and hurts the price of the token. Especially given the lack of transparency, missed timelines, disaggregation of AMP from Flexa, and the inability of AMP / Flexa to release an SDK.
Nope, can’t support a distribution until there is some clarity on what is being built and a roadmap. Still waiting for any news on the things that were supposed to already be done. Soon doesn’t cut it anymore. All other comments here have listed very valid points, much better than I an able.
I fully support this proposal.
Stop with the Governance theater. By putting this out there, you admit neither Flexa nor Ampera will have any serious volume and you need another year to ‘build’. Maybe you need to go to less trade conferences and spend more time actually building a product. It’s high time Flexa stood on its own feet. If that means the other transformer APYs go down to 0.0% (because there is no volume), so be it. Staker’s will withdraw and only the OG whales will be left. Which means Flexa needs to deploy a real product in the real world. Provide more info to justify this, or I will vote no.
GM Amplify, thanks for the comment.
As referenced in the proposal, this subsidy is a continuation of the existing Network Development Fund as initially intended. We will make an update to the original proposal to clarify.
This proposal is not for grants to new apps or wallets for integrations; this is to facilitate the continued growth of the network. A primary objective is also to further distribute AMP to active users within the Ampera ecosystem.