The Huma Finance proposal presents a promising integration with Jupiter DAO, offering real-world yield mechanisms through its PayFi protocol. The introduction of dual earning modes—Classic and Maxi—provides flexibility for users seeking stable USDC yields or maximizing Huma Feathers rewards. However, the proposal would benefit from greater transparency regarding the $250K JUP token swap, specifically the terms, lock-up periods, and potential risks involved. Additionally, the 1% HUMA allocation for JUP stakers at a $75M FDV requires more context to assess its fairness and alignment with community interests. Clarifying these aspects will enable the community to make an informed decision and ensure the partnership aligns with Jupiter DAO’s long-term goals
500,000 / 104,479,516 = .0047856 x 100 = 0.478%. That doesn’t add up to the 0.03% number stated. Who is not being straight with me?
ok lets go and will be good
Thank you for this point of view.
This vote is kind of a puzzle to me and it helps me to look at it in a less analytical way.
I do find the Huma finance project very promising (I hold PST) but I don’t understand the rational behind this proposal and what’s the added value for Jup DAO.
- Why do we compare the 1% HUMA token allocation for JUP stakers at $75M FDV with Meow’s Huma equity investment @ $171M Series A valuation. We won’t buy Huma equity, we might buy Huma tokens… these are very different things or I’m missing something.
- Why would JupDAO swap equal $ value JUP tokens with Huma tokens when JUP is at a bottom price (I hope) and Huma might be close to a 1 year top at TGE. We can see that TGE U curve pattern repeating pretty often. I sincerely hope Huma token lauch will be a huge success but I’m not here for whishfull thinking and imho the risk/reward is in Huma’s favor here. This point importance is proportional to the relatively small capital allocation here.
- But most of all : What’s the plan ? What’s the strategy here ? I’m happy to see good intents from both teams. But is there a roadmap besides marketing for Huma ?
So we’re supposed to be excited that instead of getting 1% of supply for free through ASR rewards, now we have to to pay for them? This is some max level grifting
Looking forward for the JUP X HUMA partnership. Together things scale faster, stronger and attract a bigger mass. LFG! Ready for the JUP staker pre-sale 
leeeets goooooooooooo
Hi @AG42 ! There’s something I don’t understand here :
- Series A valuation is a valuation of the Huma Finance company and Series A investors bought equity/stocks, right ?
- Here, we’re talking about valuation for a token launch ? We might be able to buy tokens, not equity in the company.
Do I get this right ? If so, I beleive that comparing these numbers is missleading and adds to the noise. Otherwise please explain what I’m missing 
My feeling is that this vote has more to do with vibez than rationals and it’s the first time that I’m puzzled by a proposal.
Thank you!
Hello all,
According to voting projections, the proposal is expected to pass, now we just have to wait and see how this alliance performs over the coming months.
By lending the “Jupiter seal” to external projects, Jupiter must be fully aware of the nature and risks of those initiatives. Everyone should do their own research, “yes”… , but we can’t ignore that, as a reputable brand, Jupiter must also be accountable for what it endorses.
And we mustn’t forget that JUP’s price is down about –56% over the past year and roughly –73% below its all-time high.
Furthermore, the leading memecoins have delivered an annual average return far above JUP’s –55.62% over the same period.
Right now, memecoins, despite their high volatility, are posting higher returns than many infrastructure projects.
Jupiter should continue to foster partnerships, but focus primarily on its own token, strengthening in-house development and supporting JUP’s appreciation.
Cheers,
@Rodrigues770471
I applaud the general idea: Have Jupiter DAO do some VC investments.
Why not?
Jupiter has the leverage to make deals (and hey: FTX’s Anthropic stake was worth 1.4B by the time the bankruptcy proceedings were in full flight).
But the deal makes not a lot of sense. Not at this stage in the game.
Why would Huma, with a solid fintech pedigree outside of crypto (though EarnIn is currently coming under fire for alleged predatory lending), give such a steep discount to Jupiter DAO over actual VCs?
I know there’s the crypto angle but surely doing commerical deals with Jupiter is money better spent? A few memes and threads doesn’t seem like good value for a payments provider that actually needs serious ground game in emerging markets to get traction (see: Tron’s dominance in stable coin payments in LATAM and Asia).
Secondly the PayFi Stack seems crazy complicated. 6 layers. Built on Solana, Stellar (remember Stellar from back in the day? Only just launched smart contracts recently…) and Circle (if you count CCTP as a kinda blockchain) it seems like it’s been designed to collect grants rather than make payments easier.
My suspicion is this is a high valuation for Huma at this stage. A lot of existing payments projects have had a lot of trouble raising more money of late. If you’ve been slogging away at crypto for payments then you’ve faced a heap of competition for not much business. Stellar and XRP are entire blockchains devoted to essentially just payments.
Bitcoin was supposed to be only for payments.
The aforementioned Tron is where most payments are being made and that business has proved to be very difficult to shift off Tron because it’s more than tech alone keeping it there.
Payments is PMF for crypto but it’s not the size of business most predicted it would be by now. Instead trading has proved to be multiples the size and value of payments and novel use cases around asset issuance have proved to be breakout hits. Stepn, Axie, and NFTs last cycle; Pump, Hyperliquid and memecoins this cycle.
If Jupiter DAO is going to propose VC style investments (and to be clear: I think this is a good idea to seek out these) then it has been to be something that is early, novel (and novel in idea and/or implementation), and linked to high growth potential.
And there’s been a heap of good questions asked by others here (shout out particularly to @ihateoranges for their contributions) that haven’t been addressed.
It’s going to be NO for me on this one.
Hi Babooun! I’m not sure about the details of the round, but in general you are correct, comparing equity to tokens is inappropriate. There were quite a few questions specifically about the valuation at which Meow and Siong participated in, and I should’ve made my sentence clearer. It is a bit misleading.
As for the vote having to do more with the vibes - to some extent yes. Its main question is whether we want to form an alliance with Huma Finance, and as of now there are quite a few unknowns to make a fully rational choice.
AG’s numbers are more accurate. I was only looking at one wallet and neglected the cold wallets.
Besides, the exact percentage isn’t that important. Bottom line is that it is a tiny fraction of the $JUP in the DAO treasury.
One of the biggest disappointments for me has been Erbil’s unwillingness to answer questions in this thread.
Yes, he’s done a Reddit AMA and a Town Hall but he should also be in here backing up his proposal with answer to questions from the community.
second it. Putting Huma itself aside, does this set an example of Jup DAO’s future moves?
- How’s this alliance proposal started? Who proposed it and how the discussion was? JUP holders have no info of it at all.
- what’s next? Is this one-time collaboration, or will JUP DAO have such alliance with more 1:1 swap with endless new projects?
Huma Finance published detailed tokenomics:
It looks like a interesting partnership, amplifying services at users disposal! congrats!
lol who ever vote yes for this would be crazy . This is a rip off
i think $HUMA as a utility token will drive people to make money of the USDC yeild rather than the token itself.
if we see buffered apy from staking HUMA thatd be a game changer