I would like to address a discrepancy in the data you’ve presented. According to the Inspex data you referenced, JonesDAO requested 2M ARB. However, based on the actual project proposal, they only asked for 200k ARB. This error affects the total grant calculations. By my calculations, taking all project proposals into account, the correct total should be 72,250,544 ARB, not the 74,050,544 ARB you cited. (total grants - Google Sheets)
Building on this point, and acknowledging the robust enthusiasm for the STIP, I’d like to express my concerns about the proposed extension of the grant program. While there’s no doubt that all qualifying projects stand to benefit substantially from an increased pool, we must take a step back and evaluate the broader market consequences of such an expansion.
From a detailed analysis, taking into account the cumulative grant requests and the proposed 3-month program timeline, I’ve deduced that we are potentially looking at an emission rate of approximately 802,783.82 ARB/day. This number, when translated to the current market value, amounts to a staggering $642,227.05 of ARB that could be introduced into the market on a daily basis. And 72,250,544 ARB($5,7800,435.2) selling pressure in 3 months period
The market could experience significant selling pressure, leading to potential price volatility or depreciation. This doesn’t just affect traders or speculators, but every participant in the ecosystem, as the ARB’s value and stability are foundational to the success and perception of the entire project.
Lastly, while I understand the initial consensus may have leaned towards a grant program size expansion, I’d like to remind the community that our decisions should be rooted not just in present circumstances but also in considerations of longer-term sustainability and market health. It’s essential to strike a balance between incentivizing new projects and ensuring market stability.