# Discussion: Supporting GMX Solana Expansion via Monthly GT Token Treasury Swap **URL:** \ **Category:** Proposals\ **Created:** [August 6, 2025, 7:32am UTC](https://gov.gmx.io/t/discussion-supporting-gmx-solana-expansion-via-monthly-gt-token-treasury-swap/4762 "2025-08-06T07:32:39Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 13\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![xdev\_10](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/gov.gmx.io/xdev_10/32/196_2.png) [@xdev\_10](https://gov.gmx.io/u/xdev_10)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2025, 4:19am UTC](https://gov.gmx.io/t/discussion-supporting-gmx-solana-expansion-via-monthly-gt-token-treasury-swap/4762/22 "2025-08-14T04:19:48Z")
in my personal view, Q has worked continuously to help improve GMX Q being one of the largest holders of $GMX, to me shows his belief in the project, and i strongly believe that Q’s long term interests are aligned towards the benefits for GMX to clarify, my view isn’t that because someone owns a large amount of $GMX that their actions cannot be questioned i think it is useful to ask questions to clarify if any communication was unclear, and to request for further transparency, but i also feel that it should be done in a way that facilitates discussion ---
**Author:** ![xdev\_10](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/gov.gmx.io/xdev_10/32/196_2.png) [@xdev\_10](https://gov.gmx.io/u/xdev_10)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2025, 4:39am UTC](https://gov.gmx.io/t/discussion-supporting-gmx-solana-expansion-via-monthly-gt-token-treasury-swap/4762/23 "2025-08-14T04:39:08Z")
for the concentration of voting power, i would agree that having more delegates may be good for the time being, in the proposal process, Snapshot proposals are required to pass before the Tally proposal, unless the Tally proposal is just executing on previously approved Snapshot proposals the Snapshot voting power is based on holdings instead of delegations, so the voting power is more distributed and representative of what the community prefers, the Tally is just for following up on the implementation > **[GMX | GMX Docs](https://docs.gmx.io/docs/governance/proposal-process/)** > > GMX is a decentralized spot and perpetual exchange that supports low swap fees and low price impact trades. ---
**Author:** ![Saulius](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/gov.gmx.io/saulius/32/455_2.png) [@Saulius](https://gov.gmx.io/u/Saulius)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2025, 9:35am UTC](https://gov.gmx.io/t/discussion-supporting-gmx-solana-expansion-via-monthly-gt-token-treasury-swap/4762/24 "2025-08-18T09:35:40Z")
> [@gmsolq](#): > > Let’s first talk about how the 50k GMX was purchased. There had always been a plan to push forward the GMX reserve as soon as possible, but there hadn’t been a suitable opportunity. What do you mean by “to push forward the GMX reserve”? When asked the DAO for gmx v2 code licensing, $455k payments for audits and initial LP support, promise from GMX-SOLANA was to put 30% of the generated USDC fees into GM-GMX/USD pool. It turned out to some mysterious transactions with you private GMX purchases and “swaps” with treasury. So if treasury swaped your 50k GMX\<\>USDC and now you requesting these GMX back to your personal account it means USDC from treasury gone? GMX-SOLANA dashboard currently shows $1,360,132 in total generated fees. Can we have some transparency here with a detailed report where these funds ended up? ---
**Author:** ![gmsolz](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/gov.gmx.io/gmsolz/32/1771_2.png) [@gmsolz](https://gov.gmx.io/u/gmsolz)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2025, 12:05pm UTC](https://gov.gmx.io/t/discussion-supporting-gmx-solana-expansion-via-monthly-gt-token-treasury-swap/4762/25 "2025-08-18T12:05:24Z")
Clarification on GMX-SOLANA Treasury 1. The GMX purchased by the GMX-SOLANA Treasury is still held on Tally and has not yet been used to build the GM: GMX/USD pool. This is due to prolonged delays in bridging GMX to Solana, which was originally part of the GMX development plan. 2. All GMX-SOLANA Treasury expenditures are executed through multisig proposals of the GMX-SOLANA DAO. The structure is a 5-out-of-7 multisig, including three GMX-SOLANA core contributors and four GMX core contributors. This ensures that GMX-SOLANA spending is overseen by GMX core contributors. ---
**Author:** ![gmsolq](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/gov.gmx.io/gmsolq/32/1307_2.png) [@gmsolq](https://gov.gmx.io/u/gmsolq)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2025, 2:59pm UTC](https://gov.gmx.io/t/discussion-supporting-gmx-solana-expansion-via-monthly-gt-token-treasury-swap/4762/26 "2025-08-18T14:59:43Z")
**Breakdown of Total Fees (1.36M):** - **30% to LPs** → 408k - **60% to GMXSOL Treasury** → 816k (~540k retained in treasury, remainder used for GT buyback) - **10% to Tech and Ops** → 136k From launch until now (5 months), the protocol has already incurred the following costs: - Risk management: 110k for two quarters - Audit: 200k for two quarters - Servers and other infrastructure: 50k - Other minor expenses combined This totals 136k + 300k (already advanced expenses) = 436k, far exceeding the 136k allocation. So how does the protocol continue to operate without external financing? The answer is: my **personal account** has been covering these costs upfront. The role of the Treasury—whether GMX Treasury or GMXSOL Treasury—is first and foremost to ensure the protocol’s survival and development. Only when there is surplus capacity should GMXSOL Treasury, as promised, use it to buy GMX and even entrust it to GMX DAO for custody. But priorities must be clear. Even when compensating expenses, we have **never sold GMX** ; overall, the net position remains **buying GMX** , which is the maximum limit we can realistically achieve. ### **Recreating the Situation of Building the GMX Reserve** When GMX fell below 10 USD, I believed it was an excellent opportunity for GMXSOL to build a GMX reserve. At that time, GMXSOL Treasury had about 540k USDC. Because of extreme volatility, by the time consensus could be reached, the price might have shifted significantly. So I immediately bought 500k USDC worth of GMX. At that time, my thinking was that there were three possible outcomes: 1. **Multisig rejection:** If the GMXSOL multisig (5/7) disagreed with the GMX reserve plan, then it would simply mean I personally purchased 500k worth of GMX. That would be acceptable to me. 2. **Price drop:** If the value of this 500k GMX dropped to, say, 400k, then the proposal would only reimburse me 400k USDC for the GMX, ensuring that the Treasury would not take a loss. 3. **Price increase:** If the value of this 500k GMX rose and, by the time the proposal was submitted, the price exceeded 11.5, then I would **not keep the profit**. Effectively, GMXSOL Treasury would spend 500k USDC to obtain 575k worth of GMX. In short: GMX always acts strictly based on DAO decisions, and I generally follow the same principle. But in special cases like this one, I act first, bear the risks myself, and leave the gains to GMX. Even if the 5/7 multisig had rejected the proposal, I could have accepted that outcome. ### **Official Announcement at the Time** **[2025.04.07\_1]** **Establishing the GMX Reserve for GMX Solana** We are pleased to announce that now is an opportune time to establish the GMX reserve for GMX Solana, in light of the upcoming bridging of GMX to Solana. To this end, we will be carrying out the following operation: **Background:** - 49,783 GMX purchased at an average price of $10.04, totaling 500,000 USDC - Acquired GMX withdrawn to an Arbitrum address: - All GMX transferred to the GMX Treasury (Tally) for temporary custody: **Execution:** 1. 500,000 USDC should be transferred from GMXSOL Treasury to the operation team to complete the buyback via its 5/7 multisig. The proposal for this operation is: 2. Upon completion of the GMX bridge to Solana, GMX Treasury should transfer the custodied GMX to GMXSOL Treasury. GMXSOL Treasury will then use the entirety of this GMX to purchase GM in the GM:GMX-USDC pool, as previously agreed. **Impacts following Step 1:** - A temporary decrease in GMXSOL Treasury’s asset value from ~$540,000 to ~$40,000 until the GMX bridge is settled - Daily maximum GT buyback value will be limited to 1,600 USDC until the GMX bridge is completed We appreciate your continued support and understanding as we take this important step toward strengthening GMX Solana. **This level of transparency is the maximum I can provide. Go ahead and make your decision.** ---
**Author:** ![Saulius](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/gov.gmx.io/saulius/32/455_2.png) [@Saulius](https://gov.gmx.io/u/Saulius)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2025, 3:17pm UTC](https://gov.gmx.io/t/discussion-supporting-gmx-solana-expansion-via-monthly-gt-token-treasury-swap/4762/27 "2025-08-18T15:17:11Z")
Respect for your response and the detailed funds flow statement. Fewer questions and misunderstandings would have been raised if such a report had been provided in the first post on this topic, before requesting additional and significant support from the GMX treasury. ---
**Author:** ![Kalcrypto1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/d78d45/32.png) [@Kalcrypto1](https://gov.gmx.io/u/Kalcrypto1)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2025, 7:38pm UTC](https://gov.gmx.io/t/discussion-supporting-gmx-solana-expansion-via-monthly-gt-token-treasury-swap/4762/28 "2025-08-18T19:38:40Z")
Just got around to read the entire thread. Appreciate all the healthy discussion. Very valid questions raised and have gotten thoughtful responses. My personal take is very close to X’s level headed take here. > [@Discussion: Supporting GMX Solana Expansion via Monthly GT Token Treasury Swap](https://gov.gmx.io/t/discussion-supporting-gmx-solana-expansion-via-monthly-gt-token-treasury-swap/4762/5): > > some thoughts on this proposal GMX Solana has delivered on the code for the GMX Solana perp DEX, however finding the right product market fit has been difficult, if this investment is made we must also accept that it may not eventually pay off My understanding is that all core GMX Solana contributors are working on a voluntary basis and not receiving any payments, I believe the cost of $110k is only for infra, interface devs and audits for security. I think it would be good if a high level bre… I appreciate the detailed breakdown of current expenses and the plan of things coming up. Being one of the active contributors in GMX I first hand know how hard it is build things and release products, how much effort it takes to bring them to market and get adoption on them. It is even harder to hire qualified people and scale the team to get timely results while at the same time keeping security and safety as the top priority. Even though GMX Solana hasn’t achieved the success it deserves already the amount of work and accomplishments and the constant improvement it has been doing is very impressive. They started with making a fresh build from GMX V2 into Rust which itself is challenging undertaking but now are ahead of GMX in iteration and in bringing things to market certain areas like RWA and other key experiments which we can’t do at main GMX product yet and will benefit GMX overall in the long run. While I agree with cost conscious folks take that 100K per month is not a small amount but in my take is absolutely worth it for us to not give up on GMX solana at this critical juncture and continue to give our best support to really pull it together so these innovations and experiments continue to bring to market and take a share in solana ecosystem. Another way to think about this is we have a talented team working in parallel in a very healthy competitive landscape like solana with a lot of potential and head start and this is a worthy investment for me considering the overall health of GMX treasury. I don’t see a quick way we can spend equivalent amount to get the kind of quality output without having some scaling issues or sacrificing some other priorities. Wishing all the best for GMX Solana on this. Saying this I would like the proposal to have some checkpoints/milestones for governance and publish a report once every 3 months so we keep checking in that things are going smoothly. ---
**Author:** ![BlueBerry\_KR](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/bb73d2/32.png) [@BlueBerry\_KR](https://gov.gmx.io/u/BlueBerry_KR)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2025, 7:47pm UTC](https://gov.gmx.io/t/discussion-supporting-gmx-solana-expansion-via-monthly-gt-token-treasury-swap/4762/29 "2025-08-18T19:47:35Z")
Fully Support. Building a new product takes time and commitment. The GMX Solana team has continued to innovate and improve the product. Quitting support now would show the GMX DAO lacks commitment, and I think other teams would be reluctant to support GMX in a similar fashion in the future. ---
**Author:** ![pegcity](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/6a8cbe/32.png) [@pegcity](https://gov.gmx.io/u/pegcity)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2025, 9:03pm UTC](https://gov.gmx.io/t/discussion-supporting-gmx-solana-expansion-via-monthly-gt-token-treasury-swap/4762/30 "2025-08-18T21:03:47Z")
A few points: First the 110K does seem like a lot when the treasury seems to be fairly flat in value most of the time. Is there somewhere one can view the current treasury monthly spend categories? Is there sufficient revenue at this time to do this without drawing down the treasury? Seeing the high costs of audit / security for GMX-SOL I would assume there are even higher costs for GMX. I value the contributions GMX-SOL has made, from what the devs are saying it appears to the a great test-bed / low risk dev environment due to currently low TVL/OI. I’ve always had reservations about GMX on Solana given it’s much, much smaller population of higher net worth investors that are looking for real investing tools vs. degen shitcoin gamblers. I know they exist, but do enough of them exist? Either way, even as a test bed / development team the value certainly exists. A successful GMX-SOL would be a boon to the project, I liked [Jonzee’s](https://gov.gmx.io/t/discussion-supporting-gmx-solana-expansion-via-monthly-gt-token-treasury-swap/4762/9) comment, it’s always seemed strange to me there was such a weird separation between GMX and GMX Solana, perhaps integrating it more in our current deployments would be a good help. I’m ready to vote yes if for no other reason than GMX Solana represents a great R&D team for the moment, and a potential future payoff if they can break through and gain some adoption. But, I would want to see some sort of accounting on the current treasury, as much as it has value it doesn’t warrant risking the financial stability of GMX. ---
**Author:** ![Snipermonke01](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/gov.gmx.io/snipermonke01/32/602_2.png) [@Snipermonke01](https://gov.gmx.io/u/Snipermonke01)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2025, 6:13am UTC](https://gov.gmx.io/t/discussion-supporting-gmx-solana-expansion-via-monthly-gt-token-treasury-swap/4762/31 "2025-08-28T06:13:29Z")
I was initially hesitant and was leaning towards abstain, if not rejecting. It is undeniable that after a strong start, the KPIs have fallen off and have not yielded the expected sustained returns. For this reason, the natural reaction would be against. However, gaining the perspectives of core contributors, that the deployment itself is yielding benefits not necessarily seen from the outside is a compelling one. Of course, as X has stated, this long term is not a reason alone to continue justifying costs, but with this in mind to say the GMX Solana deployment has been fruitless is incorrect. I support extending support through GT swap, with reassessment further down the line. The GMX treasury is healthy enough that we can take these risks and not be at risk of compromising support of GMX Multichain and future developments. Competition is fierce, and we have the firepower to take risks. To say GMX has stagnated in the last year or so is fair, and we need to take action. ---
**Author:** ![Snipermonke01](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/gov.gmx.io/snipermonke01/32/602_2.png) [@Snipermonke01](https://gov.gmx.io/u/Snipermonke01)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2025, 6:17am UTC](https://gov.gmx.io/t/discussion-supporting-gmx-solana-expansion-via-monthly-gt-token-treasury-swap/4762/32 "2025-08-28T06:17:35Z")
> [@pegcity](#): > > But, I would want to see some sort of accounting on the current treasury, as much as it has value it doesn’t warrant risking the financial stability of GMX. gm peg, this is not an exhaustive overview, but I’ve created a dashboard of sorts here: [https://gmx-treasury-dashboard.onrender.com/](https://gmx-treasury-dashboard.onrender.com/) ---
**Author:** ![Remarkles](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bbe5ce/32.png) [@Remarkles](https://gov.gmx.io/u/Remarkles)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2025, 3:53pm UTC](https://gov.gmx.io/t/discussion-supporting-gmx-solana-expansion-via-monthly-gt-token-treasury-swap/4762/33 "2025-08-28T15:53:24Z")
i would like to know how GMXSol plans to do marketing? we have 3 components - strong backend, weak frontend (which will be solved) and low awareness (marketing). How will the last point be solved? in my opinion, even with the best product, without strong marketing it does not matter. also, i would like to say that GMX should get as much as possible from this deal in the future - accordingly, it is necessary to make mint GTat the average price of the current buyback ---
**Author:** ![Rob](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/gov.gmx.io/rob/32/1790_2.png) [@Rob](https://gov.gmx.io/u/Rob)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2025, 9:32pm UTC](https://gov.gmx.io/t/discussion-supporting-gmx-solana-expansion-via-monthly-gt-token-treasury-swap/4762/34 "2025-08-31T21:32:36Z")
[Previous page](https://gov.gmx.io/t/discussion-supporting-gmx-solana-expansion-via-monthly-gt-token-treasury-swap/4762.md?page=1)