I don't really understand why 99 cents was a problem in the first place...
I don't really understand why 99 cents was a problem in the first place...
2026-07-22 · Kalshi · 27 条相关讨论
I don't really understand why 99 cents was a problem in the first place...
I don't really understand why 99 cents was a problem in the first place...
Whoever's resting at 99c is providing liquidity to the strike... anyone can go buy the other side at 1c
Whoever's resting at 99c is providing liquidity to the strike... anyone can go buy the other side at 1c
If kalshi doesn't want to offer incentives on past events, then resolve the markets on time
If kalshi doesn't want to offer incentives on past events, then resolve the markets on time
and if it's not a past event, again they are providing liquidity to something that kalshi thought needed liquidity... so what exactly is the issue?
and if it's not a past event, again they are providing liquidity to something that kalshi thought needed liquidity... so what exactly is the issue?
past events attract bonders who are already incentivized by a risk-free 1c profit, so it seems useless to incentivize any further
past events attract bonders who are already incentivized by a risk-free 1c profit, so it seems useless to incentivize any further
What's your point? Past events shouldn't be bettable in the first place - they should be resolved
What's your point? Past events shouldn't be bettable in the first place - they should be resolved
If anything, this helps them resolve the markets more quickly
If anything, this helps them resolve the markets more quickly
which is a positive
which is a positive
i mean sure, prompt resolution is better than late... but early isn't always good (there have been instances where kalshi resolved too soon), and sometimes the contract terms neccessitate waiting until the resolution source comes out, despite the outcome being certain already
i mean sure, prompt resolution is better than late... but early isn't always good (there have been instances where kalshi resolved too soon), and sometimes the contract terms neccessitate waiting until the resolution source comes out, despite the outcome being certain already
Ok, then the bonder is providing liquidity
Ok, then the bonder is providing liquidity
It's either a) a good flag for kalshi to resolve things in a timely manner or b) someone is providing liquidty on something (even if it's a very likely outcome)
It's either a) a good flag for kalshi to resolve things in a timely manner or b) someone is providing liquidty on something (even if it's a very likely outcome)
well, i'm saying that the bonders will come bond the market anyway, regardless of the liq incentive
well, i'm saying that the bonders will come bond the market anyway, regardless of the liq incentive
sure but that's providing value either way
sure but that's providing value either way
i know. i agree the bonders provide value. i'm just saying kalshi doesn't need to incentivize that behavior because it comes for free
i know. i agree the bonders provide value. i'm just saying kalshi doesn't need to incentivize that behavior because it comes for free
(FWIW, I bond stuff to the tune of 6 figures all the time)
(FWIW, I bond stuff to the tune of 6 figures all the time)
i see what you're saying - im just not sure there's a solution that's not gameable if you want to exclude 99c bonders from rewards
i see what you're saying - im just not sure there's a solution that's not gameable if you want to exclude 99c bonders from rewards
hm, I'm not sure I follow... how are people gaming the 99c exclusion?
hm, I'm not sure I follow... how are people gaming the 99c exclusion?
was also curious on ^
was also curious on ^
if people are exploiting it (and you don't like it), may as well just share it publicly to ruin the edge as a temporary fix until kalshi does something about it 🙂
if people are exploiting it (and you don't like it), may as well just share it publicly to ruin the edge as a temporary fix until kalshi does something about it 🙂
yeah crossed my mind, understood though if someone doesn't want to give out there edge 🙂
yeah crossed my mind, understood though if someone doesn't want to give out there edge 🙂
I think both problems could be solved if liquidity rewards ACTUALLY only accrued for the first 1,000 shares in line, if people want to port their entire balance as a stack that's great but it should pnly start rewarding when they get in the first front 1,000 in line. Kalshi should reward people actually providing liquidity and getting filled, not people shilling the orderbook with bids they hope are never filled. I say this as someone who has earned more than my fair share of rewards with massive bids that never get filled. I know how to gain the current system but it does very little to actually increase liquidity in the markets as I assume Kalshi intends
I think both problems could be solved if liquidity rewards ACTUALLY only accrued for the first 1,000 shares in line, if people want to port their entire balance as a stack that's great but it should pnly start rewarding when they get in the first front 1,000 in line. Kalshi should reward people actually providing liquidity and getting filled, not people shilling the orderbook with bids they hope are never filled. I say this as someone who has earned more than my fair share of rewards with massive bids that never get filled. I know how to gain the current system but it does very little to actually increase liquidity in the markets as I assume Kalshi intends
With the current rewards system a majority of the liquidity is fake, it gets pulled before meaningful fills either purposefully or due to orders being cancelled due to insufficient funds. Rewarding only the first 1,000 shares keeps the orderbook accurate and honest
With the current rewards system a majority of the liquidity is fake, it gets pulled before meaningful fills either purposefully or due to orders being cancelled due to insufficient funds. Rewarding only the first 1,000 shares keeps the orderbook accurate and honest
I think the only real fix is not having a set reward period but instead having some mechanism where once a strike hits 99 and is stable for say 30 minutes? or some arbitrary time period that the rewards end even if the market stays open
I think the only real fix is not having a set reward period but instead having some mechanism where once a strike hits 99 and is stable for say 30 minutes? or some arbitrary time period that the rewards end even if the market stays open
The drawback to rewarding only the first 1000 shares is that you remove the incentive to provide any additional liq beyond the first 1000. On a quiet market that already has 1000 at bbo, traders probably wouldn't want to add any additional liquidity because it's very possible they won't receive any rewards at all (until enough fills occur to reduce the queue) From Kalshi's perspective, I think they'd prefer that traders compete with each other to offer the most shares at bbo. (Even if they all play musical chairs to avoid being at the front of the line)
The drawback to rewarding only the first 1000 shares is that you remove the incentive to provide any additional liq beyond the first 1000. On a quiet market that already has 1000 at bbo, traders probably wouldn't want to add any additional liquidity because it's very possible they won't receive any rewards at all (until enough fills occur to reduce the queue) From Kalshi's perspective, I think they'd prefer that traders compete with each other to offer the most shares at bbo. (Even if they all play musical chairs to avoid being at the front of the line)
One thing that might help is to increase the target shares to a much higher number, like 10k or 100k
One thing that might help is to increase the target shares to a much higher number, like 10k or 100k
Poly offers maker rebates, which only pay out if you get filled ( you get a cut of trade fees). That seems like a good way to incentivize people to provide "useful" liquidity
Poly offers maker rebates, which only pay out if you get filled ( you get a cut of trade fees). That seems like a good way to incentivize people to provide "useful" liquidity
this seems like the most sensible solution imo
this seems like the most sensible solution imo