List of Cardano / ADA staking pools


#203

CardanoHub has more infor on staking now: https://www.cardano.org/en/staking/

They give some hypothetical inflation numbers on staking around 2% per year. This is nowhere near what we were led to believe earlier.


Staking and monetary policy update
#204

Only for the first year, tho. They show more awesome system of the fixed reserve decrease rate, instead of fixed inflation. At the shown decrease of 5% a year inflation will be 2.2581% for the first year, 2.0978% for the second one, and 1.2195% in the year 10.

UPD: Moved further description and discussion to the separate topic:


Hello from Telluride
#206

@AdamSabla if you could be so kind and add my staking pool http://fractalide.com/cardano-stake-pool/


#207

@AdamSabla, I took the liberty and added it to the list :slight_smile:


#208

Hi @sjmackenzie,

I just followed your link and read this:
“When you nominate Fractalide’s stake pool to vote for you, all earnings, after server costs, go into development of Fractalide’s open source dapp browser. By nominating Fractalide, you’re helping improve Fractalide and the Cardano ecosystem.”

Quick question for clarity: Are you planning to extract a % premium from the rewards of your stakeholders in your pool to fund the development of Fractalide’s open source dapp browser?

Thanks!


#209

@Risus76, from this direct quote from the website it seems that the whole reward will go toward the development: “When you nominate Fractalide’s stake pool to vote for you, all earnings, after server costs, go into development of Fractalide’s open source dapp browser"

UPD: turns out I was wrong on this one ^ See comments below :slight_smile:

This is what known as a “donation pool”. Possibility of having and creating those were discussed some long time ago. A “standard” (in a user perspective) pool is one that gets all the reward for each user, then subtracts a percentage for its own services and then gives the rest to the stakeholder user. A “donation” pool is one where the subtracted percentage is 100% :slight_smile: The logic is the same as you would just send your own ADA, received from a standard pool, as a donation to a company, but the difference is that it’s much simpler for a user, since he does not have to manage any regular donations manually. Additionally, many users may consider that there’s no point in donating, for example, 0.01 ADA per month, but if a few thousand users delegate a small stake to a donation pool, and each stake only gives 0.01 ADA - they sum up to a decent number.

Some discussed use-cases for a donation pool were like: a developers company that uses all rewards to develop something for an ecosystem, or a charity organisation that uses all rewards to fund its activity, or a non-profit that uses all rewards to promote Cardano and educate people, etc. Basically any company, that would normally ask people for donations, can run a node and claim the whole reward or it’s major part as a donation. This way users not only support this organisation, but also support the network by funding an additional node. Like a “quid pro quo” between the community and the organisation :slight_smile:

Of course, such a pool or organisation would have to provide the double amount of transparency, compared to a “standard” pool, because not only they have to show that they pool is operating as claimed, but also they have to demonstrate that donations are really used as intended.

But generally, for all stakeholders, it might be a nice idea to delegate some part of their stake to such pools. Not only it helps the network (if nodes are operated well, of course), but also might help the organisation. So if you like their goals - that’s a nice way to organise a donating process.


#210

@Risus76 I sat across the table with the IOHK guys a few weeks ago and discussed at length on this topic. The exact specification of the pools is pretty much finalized but it’s for IOHK to reveal their hand. Hence the Fractalide Stake pool structure is not finalized. Though I’d like to make it such that nominators also earn from their staking. When I said “all earnings”, I was referring to the pool’s earnings and not the nominator’s earnings. Let’s see what happens when things become concrete it’s just too early to tell.


#211

@Risus76 I’ve tried to clarify it a bit further on http://fractalide.com/cardano-stake-pool/. This is currently my understand on how things MIGHT work.

We’ll make our costs and spendings transparent. If you appreciate Fractalide and want your experience improved, then nominate us to stake for you. The more nominators the lighter it is for everyone. All pool earnings (not nominator earnings), after server costs, goes into development of the open source Hyperflow dapp browser. By nominating Fractalide, you’re helping improve Fractalide and the Cardano ecosystem.


#212

Thank you, @vantuz-subhuman. As usual, a very detailed and awesome explanation. You rock!:smiley:


#213

The idea of the dapp sounds good. However, for the pool of funds isn’t the Cardano treasury model supposed to have “the” pool of funds which will support such development?

A given portion of the block reward will go the treasury from ALL stake pools, correct?

Proposals for useful apps (or any other improvement) can be submitted for consideration and proposals that bubble up through voting will get funded by the Cardano treasury. In this model accountability, transparency, and prioritization will be taken care of as part of the network.

Given that, do isolated donation pools add any more value to the network?


#214
  1. I was wrong about assuming the “Fractalide” would be strictly a “donation” pool and I have mentioned that in my comment now :slight_smile: They are looking into spending their profits on the development, so maybe it is solvable by just making the pool fee a bit higher.

  2. The more independent pools there are - the better. I don’t see any problem here. If someone don’t want to operate a pool - they can try to push a funding proposal, but when a company operates a strictly “donation” pool (not a “Fractalide” case) - it’s basically kinda the same idea as just using part of donated money to run a node to show the respect to the platform.

  3. Winning a funding proposal could make some people who didn’t want to support this project as being robbed of their taxes. A “donation” pool on the other hand is just open for people who voluntarely donates a part of their stake, which also helps the network in general (node diversification).

I don’t see how treasury-funding and “donation” pools would contradict each other :slight_smile: Those are just different ways to organise a funding process. With different pros and cons, and of different scale. Both ways have their right and niche for existence and only make the whole platform\ecosystem reacher with potential.


#215

Please read @vantuz-subhuman 's comment. @canopus later on once the Fractalide platform is more mature and the treasury is live we intend on applying to the treasury for enough funds to create a second implementation of Cardano in Fractalide. A pool cannot cover such costs.


#216

Thanks @vantuz-subhuman, I was thinking a bit too much about the process itself. I take it that making or receiving donations to support any purpose is totally independent with all the “freedom”. In that sense it does not conflict with ANY thing. There is always use for “more” funds especially when it comes from voluntary donors.

However, I still don’t see how a (donation) stake pool node would help with this. Won’t the stake rewards be sent directly to the addresses that delegated their stake to the pool? OR would the wallets of stake pool operators work as a custodian and then would have to distribute the funds to the respective stake holders?

I tend to believe that the stake pool operator’s wallet will have no role in distributing the funds to stake holders. In that case how would the stake pool operator redirect the staking rewards to the “donation pool” address ?


#217

It is expected that reward should be distributed “automatically” by the protocol. By you should expect that a pool when it’s registering can specify any pool fee they want. For example, a “standard” pool when registering can specify it’s fee as 5% and place a note that they expect this fee to cover all their expenses and also provide salary to employees. Another pool can set a fee at 8%, for example, and place a not that their fee is a bit higher because they provide professional data-center level redundancy and 24/7 support for all the hardware, so expected reliability is much higher, but so is the cost.

So in the case of “donations” - we expect that it will be possible for a pool to set its fee to 50%, or 75%, or 100% and in that case all the reward will be automatically redirected to a pool. In this case they can also place a note that all the reward, received by the pool, will be spent on such and such.


#218

Thanks again @vantuz-subhuman, now I get it.

I was taking the comments from some of the IOHK videos literally :slight_smile:

I was assuming that there’s literally nothing that a stake pool would be able to do to differentiate itself from any other pool. I was assuming that somehow the fees will be determined and applied uniformly for all stake pools in the network. Additionally, I was also assuming that the data center redundancy and “always online” availability was a pre-requisite :smile:

Allowing stake pools to choose the fees they would charge is interesting.


#219

Well, it is pre-requisite up to the point that a node will be slashed in rewards for missing its slots. But everything other than that is not and cannot be forced by the protocol itself, and since it’s an open-participation system - any node can join. So it is expected for now that different pools will compete in terms of quality and services provided.

Yes, the whole system is very cool. You can read additional info on that in these particular comments, or in their whole threads:

  1. [Question] Running a node while joining a staking pool?
  2. Suggestion : Bring ‘bonus reward’ system to encourage longer contribution to the pool

#220

This suggests that the most efficient pools that offer the best relative reward/fee ratio will be successful in attracting stake participants. But since each node cannot be more than a given % of the total network stake, wouldn’t this have a forced redistribution effect of stakeholders to other “less ideal” pools?


#221

Yes. The system implies 1/k reward capping, so it will force people to select k top pools. For example if they make k=100 - all stakeholders as a group will be economically forced to find 100 best pools. That’s the beauty of it :slight_smile:


#222

I have been thinking: if they make ‘k==100’ then would there even be a reason to solo stake? I am assuming there aren’t many people with a stake of >=1%


#223

Question to the Pool Operators:

What are your expected all-in costs to operate a pool per epoch? Would you be able to share the component breakdown in USD?

Thank you