
Beverly Ross
34 posts







flare-networks:native token economics have changed. @HugoPhilion explains how FIP16 redefines the role of the FLR token, reducing inflation from 5% to around 2.6% per year. He also explains why protocol yields could become much more attractive as DeFi activity on Flare grows.





1) Using historical stats from Flare for MeV is pretty pointless as the ecosystem has grown in TVL substantially. (The estimates for transaction fee burning in FIP16 are also probably low as the ecosystem is growing and historical data doesn’t take this into account.) Estimates for annual MeV earnings across the space equate to 1.5-2.0% of TVL. Personally I’d expect this to be lower on Flare as MeV harvesting will be far less aggressive than on other chains so 0.5%-0.75% is probably a better range. One of the more valuable things that can happen for Flare is growing TVL (and by proxy ecosystem usage - meaning fee burns- and also MeV earnings) by onboarding more XRP and new assets. Key to this in the near term is institutional onboarding of XRP thru exchange & custodian partnerships - eg Uphold - which can bring huge amounts of value to the chain more quickly than retail users. In the mid to longer term onboarding new assets like FBTC and RWAs (where Flare’s FCC gives Flare a strategic advantage). In summary what FIP 16 did was make FLR very low inflation (relative to most other networks now) and link net token inflation to increasing usage through transaction fees, data fees (FDC, FSA) and MeV accrual. Increasing TVL and increasing opportunities where FDC and FSA are used contributes the most towards reducing inflation / making FLR deflationary. As an aside I was massively over optimistic about how quickly TVL would come to Flare. It wasn’t intentional my estimates got hammered by 1) the continued general market bearishness 2) Yield compression across the market - which makes it harder to get a yield on borrow lend (Kinetic & Mystic) and sell cover (firelight). 3) How slowly institutions move. It is happening and happening at an increasing pace relative to a couple of months ago but the first few turns of any flywheel require a lot of effort. 2) We currently have no plans to change VM or become multi VM (practically very difficult anyway). There doesn’t look to be much value in doing so right now. 3) No we have no plans to raise capital as we don’t need to. 4) There is no particular reason for us to become a US entity at the moment. If that changes we will change with it. Tbh I spend a fair amount of time in the US anyway (and we have a lot of team in the US) so unless there is a clear legal/regulatory reason to do so it wouldn’t make any difference.

Johnny Cash: Happy Heavenly Birthday. What is your favorite Johnny Cash song?

Just signed up on @3look_io still figuring out how their campaign structure works but I like being early link in comments 🫡

This is honestly a huge step forward for what NEAR holders can do with their capital. For a long time, holding $NEAR meant your liquidity was basically locked inside one ecosystem. If you wanted to deploy it elsewhere like Solana, EVM chains, or other networks, you had to bridge, unwrap, take extra risk, and lose flexibility along the way. That friction kills capital efficiency and limits how much value users can extract from their assets. What @rhea_finance is doing here changes that dynamic in a very real way. By using NEAR Intents to power cross-chain lending, your $NEAR stops being “just a NEAR asset” and becomes truly chain-agnostic collateral. You can supply on NEAR, keep your position native, and still borrow liquidity on completely different networks. That means you can chase opportunities wherever they exist whether it be Solana, EVM chains, or even non-smart-contract environments without breaking or moving your original position. That’s a big deal for both safety and efficiency. Your NEAR stays on NEAR. Your exposure stays intact. Yet your borrowing power extends across ecosystems. It’s exactly how modern finance should work: assets remain where they’re strongest, while liquidity flows freely. The separation between native @NEARProtocol positions and cross-chain lending positions is also very important. It keeps things clean, auditable, and risk-isolated. You know what’s locked, what’s borrowed, and what’s moving across chains — no hidden mixing of funds or fragile accounting.









