Robinhood's Revenue-Sharing Model Under Fire: Soletsky vs. Goldfeder

Soletsky and Goldfeder engaged in an online discussion about Robinhood's L2, which uses Arbitrum technology. Soletsky criticized the revenue-sharing model between Robinhood and Arbitrum, stating that if Arbitrum took only 10% of the revenue, it would have covered Solana's transaction fees four times over.

Soletsky argued that instead of charging users gas fees, Robinhood could have collected a front-end fee of 50-80 bips (0.5-0.8%), as is common in the industry.

Goldefeder responded to Soletsky's criticism by pointing out that on Arbitrum, Robinhood retains 90% of the gas fees, whereas on Solana they would retain nothing and any gas fees they subsidized would come out of pocket.