Given the way that the @CedarDAO launch went, and the subsequent chart action via multiple pools, I wanted to learn more about how DLMMs work so I could better understand what was happening. Especially since I am used to seeing how AMMs work, and seeing how the price action didn't line up with the fact that they only have 18% of the SOL that they started with in the LP (4,503.88 SOL left of a starting 24,992). After doing some reading (docs.meteora.ag/product-over…), talking to those who know more than me, and relying perhaps too heavily on Grok, this is how I understand this to work, using the attached image as a reference. In a DLMM, Token Y (SOL) and Token X (CDR) are paired, and each "P" bin represents a fixed price level where 1 CDR equals a specific amount of SOL. In the image, P14 is the active bin, holding both SOL and CDR in equal proportions (visually indicated by the split colors). When someone buys CDR with SOL in P14, the bin’s CDR decreases while its SOL increases, maintaining the price within that bin as long as both tokens are available. If the buy exhausts P14’s CDR, the transaction maxes out P14’s CDR supply, and the remaining buy shifts to P15 (the next higher bin). P15 then loses CDR and gains SOL, and the price adjusts to P15’s level. Conversely, if someone sells CDR for SOL and depletes P14’s SOL, the remaining sell shifts to P13 (the next lower bin). P13 then gains CDR and loses SOL, adjusting the price to P13’s level. The "barcode" pattern in price charts occurs because the price only significantly changes when the active bin shifts (e.g., from P14 to P15 or P13). At pool creation, you configure the fee structure and liquidity distribution strategy (how much SOL and CDR each bin holds). The bin step determines the price change between bins. A bin step of 100 basis points (1%) means that if the starting price at P14 is 1 CDR = 1 SOL, moving to P15 increases the price to 1 CDR = 1.01 SOL, and moving to P13 decreases it to 1 CDR = 0.99 SOL. While SOL’s external price fluctuations can indirectly affect the pool’s dynamics, the DLMM’s price is primarily driven by the active bin’s price level. I feel like I have a grasp on this, but if I have missed some bit of nuance, or am simply mistaken on something, do please let me know. Please feel free to tag anyone who might be able to add further clarity to this.

For anyone new, or simply curious, here are the two team controlled LPs for @CedarDAO. One they launched with. dexscreener.com/solana/Hpp1H… One they conveniently moved to with a lower fee and are now promoting on their socials. dexscreener.com/solana/AGJHL… Don't believe all of their nonsense explanations of "DLMMs are so complex" or "We are rebalancing LP". They launched with a high fee LP because they knew a dump was coming, and wanted to punish sellers. Once the bleeding slowed, they created a new, lower fee LP to try and hide their disaster of a launch. More absolute shenanigans and deplorable behavior. I had hoped that with the new committee in place, we would see some semblance of normal, honest, and transparent operations. Shame on me for believing that anything would ever change.

I don't understand the point of @CedarDAO exaggerating the funds available for the LP. You can see the funds for LP here: solscan.io/account/3B2RWyDA7… Or you can check here: cedardaosecrets.com/ At time of this post, the LP value is $2.8m, not $3.5m Still a very healthy amount, so why not just provide accurate information? Unless of course there is another, as of yet undisclosed, source of funds for the LP. Additionally, how can you call @AtlasWallet the "greatest community owned product in history" when it hasn't even been released yet? These are both easily verifiable facts, so I genuinely do not understand the false narratives. I was really hoping this type of behaviour was going to cease once @SamCKx announced that he will be stepping down once Cedar was launched.

This is vile.

And in the latest blow to the @CedarDAO community, the value of their liquidity has fallen below the level that it would have been had @SamCKx simply converted completely to stable coin when they pulled it. The combined BNB pulled from EGC and Lucro was 7,741. bscscan.com/tx/0x95e6982a78a… bscscan.com/tx/0x1293299c072… bscscan.com/tx/0xdf94880bbc4… At the time it was pulled, BNB was $512 or so, for a dollar value of $3,963,392. Had they converted to stable as a snapshot, that is where it would be currently. If they had left it as BNB, with a current value of $637.17, it would have a total dollar value of $4,932,332. As it stands though, after multiple trades and finally moving to SOL, the liquidity is now worth $3,773,821. This can be seen by the screen shot of the LP wallet provided by Sam himself. To summarize; Snapshot as stable - $3,963,392 Remain as BNB - $4,932,332 Move to SOL - $3,773,821 Nearly 6 months holders have had no access to their funds, while they have been forced to watch their liquidity plummet it in value.