Ari, your analysis is 100% on point—I agree with everything you’ve outlined.
Thank you @smartcondrums for raising this proposal and addressing the liquidity challenges we’ve faced since LPL launched. It’s hard to have deep liquidity when your circulating supply is so low, this is not a bug, it’s by design.
My Experience as a Major LP
I’ve been working to solve our liquidity issues for quite some time. Until the August incident, I held 25% of the SDL/LINK liquidity on Uniswap (~$200K) and was prepared to double that position. Despite that setback, I remain committed to becoming SDL’s largest liquidity provider one day.
My position grew through consistent participation in every liquidity incentive program since inception, reinvesting all rewards. The strong APY (30%+) enabled my LP to grow massively over two years from an initial $40K investment. I’ve purchased more than $100K of $SDL throughout the years—steadily accumulating during price dips and absorbing significant price impact along the way. These transactions are verifiable on my hacked wallet hugooncrypto.eth.
Regarding the Proposed Discount
While I would personally benefit from this SLURP, I don’t support offering a discount. As mentioned, the token’s low supply and volatility represent a strategic opportunity, not a flaw—it’s by design.
I do support and would be interested in an OTC arrangement, but without the discount. Buyers already gain substantial value by avoiding slippage (your analysis showed 40% savings). That’s a significant advantage on its own. The proposed 10% discount could instead be redirected to enhance LP incentive programs, creating broader benefits for the ecosystem and LP stickiness.
Looking Forward
Our liquidity metrics are also tied to LINK’s price—we exceeded $1M in liquidity when LINK was above $20. The current 2% incentive may not adequately compensate LPs for daily impermanent loss risk and low volume. I believe we need to revisit our incentive structure to attract deeper, more sustainable liquidity.
Tokenized’s ideas in SLURP 50 provide an excellent foundation to build upon. I’m actively planning to restore my LP position and expand it further, and I’m eager to collaborate on developing programs that drive meaningful liquidity growth. Volume and trading fees is another interesting aspect for LPs that we shouldn’t neglect for our analysis.
As Ari mentioned, we should wait for the 2026 budget to come out and analyze the runway before taking any action.
If we keep the conversation collaborative, acknowledge the valid concerns on all sides, and naturally weave this OTC conversation into the broader planning cycle that’s coming up, we reduce friction, learn from this moment, and give ourselves the best chance that any move strengthens, rather than limits, the flywheels we’re building together.
Happy to discuss further and explore how we can strengthen SDL’s liquidity together.
Cheers