Can you give more details, which tokens/LP will be subcidied for bridging? Which bridge do you use under the hood, Axelar?
Can you describe a bit more how the incentive for FIAT integrations will be and how this benefits the Arbitrum ecosystem?
Hello @Djinn ,
Now that your application has been marked eligible, please be advised of the remaining steps in the application process to be completed prior to the Review Period Deadline:
Please complete the following steps required for your application to proceed to Snapshot:
Once you change your proposal title to final, please tag an Arbitrum Foundation Forum Moderator (@ stonecoldpat @ cliffton.eth @ eli_defi) by the Review Period deadline to notify them of your proposal’s readiness.
Once marked as [Final], your application post will be locked by moderators and you will no longer be able to edit your proposal.
@Djinn Here is the updated process for changing your title.
To change your proposal to final, please tag an Arbitrum Foundation Forum Moderator (@ stonecoldpat @ cliffton.eth @ eli_defi) by the Review Period deadline to notify them of your proposal’s readiness to proceed from [Draft] to [Final] status.
Once notified, the Arbitrum Foundation Forum Moderator will adjust your title from [Draft] to [Final] status. Once marked as [FInal], your application post will be locked by moderators and you will no longer be able to edit your proposal.
Firstly, thank you for your proposal and your evident enthusiasm for the Arbitrum ecosystem.
Introduction and Rationale
Vela Exchange aims to boost its Total Value Locked (TVL) and trading activity while also fostering ecosystem collaboration and bot development. They are requesting a grant of 1M ARB, which accounts for 2% of the total program availability. Vela has been a promising player in the decentralized perpetuals trading scene, and despite a setback earlier this year, they’ve relaunched and are showing positive signs. The grant aims to serve multiple aspects, from multichain & fiat onboarding to social features and trading leagues. We see value in Vela’s aspirations for Arbitrum, particularly if they can successfully attract capital via multichain and fiat onboarding.
Major Concerns
Concern Regarding Token Distribution and Milestones
- No clear plan on how the tokens for multichain & fiat onboarding will be distributed.
- Absence of a system to measure the effectiveness of the incentives.
- Our recommendation for change: Implement a detailed plan outlining token distribution and set Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) to track effectiveness, releasing funds based on milestones.
Concern Regarding Wash Trading
- Initial success attributed to airdrop speculation
- Proposed trading leagues lack measures against wash trading
- Our recommendation for change: Limit the total incentives to be less than the total fees paid to deter wash trading.
Minor Concerns
- Vagueness around incentives for bot building and new VLP Vaults.
- Our recommendation for change: Provide more detail on how these particular incentives will work and how their effectiveness will be measured.
Summary
Castle Capital values the efforts Vela Exchange has put forth and the contributions they can potentially bring to the Arbitrum ecosystem. However, in its current form, we can only support the proposal with the recommended changes. Specifically, we believe that issues regarding token distribution, milestones, and wash trading need to be properly addressed.
Our recommendations are as follows:
- Lower the requested grant amount to a maximum of 750k ARB
- Set targets for KPIs and release funds based on milestone achievements
- Limit total incentives to less than the total fees paid to avoid wash trading
We hope our comments are viewed as constructive and beneficial for the Arbitrum ecosystem at large. We’re excited to see how Vela Exchange evolves and integrates further into the community.
3 Likes
Yes - it will be Axelar / Squid.
Fiat in-flows are super important for every chain, and high fees from fiat integrators vs CEXs right now prevent an easier path to bringing USDC or other stable coins directly into an ecosystem like Arbitrum.
We are aiming to use a small portion of $ARB incentives to provide fee refunds to traders utilizing our fiat on-boarding partners.
1 Like
Great feedback, very thoughtful.
We added a limit to the trading league function (it will be focused on performance by trader rather than just flat volume anyway) and adjusted the entire program to focus more on the socialfi/trading leagues and VLP vault rewards since those KPIs will be the most direct.
Also added a section with specific KPIs we will be tracking.
1 Like
Great, @stonecoldpat @cliffton.eth @eli_defi we are good to move into the Final stage. Thanks again for all the help!
Post has been marked FINAL and locked.
Great write up, and this is a worthy dapp. Vela Exchange has been a big reason I use Arbitrum, but that aside, why do I see a few large Arbitrum holders voting “against”? Is it to attempt to isolate themselves/their projects for a possible grant allocation or something other than that? I am a small voice voting “for” 
and I would like to hear why that’s not good for the ones against Vela…
Anyway, I hope this succeeds and we can continue to grow the Arbitrum ecosystem. The different features and community on Vela are positive, and I feel the team deserves to be here just as much as GMX for example. Surely other chains want users to have the ability to trade like we do on Vela!
Thanks 
1 Like
We’re making great progress with the community’s votes! Only 20M ARB to go and we have reached quorum!
If it makes a difference for those of you who have not voted, I wrote this article to talk about the Vela Exchange’s vision and performance thus far, and why I believe that the platform will be important for Arbitrum’s growth and user adoption. You can read this article here.
Vote here: Snapshot
Thank you for submitting your proposal. Unfortunately, compared to other proposals, this one lacks detailed information. As other community members have pointed out, there is no breakdown provided under the “Social Features,” which accounts for 40% of the requested grant. The requested amount represents only 2% of the total grant pool.
Unfortunately, ITU Blockchain cannot approve the allocation of this large grant, and we vote “Against” this proposal.