Andre proposed that 1% of job fees will accrue to kp3r lockers.
Looking at past data, 1% of job fees is very little value, such that it will make no meaningful difference to the APR of kp3r lockers.
Here is a query showing historic weekly job fees assuming a 1% fee, and also another one assuming 10% job fees.
https://dune.xyz/embeds/359899/689037/0f703a98-c501-422f-bbe4-966b13b11c74
10% job fees makes much more sense from an economic standpoint for kp3r lockers.
Discuss.
Against this.
Reason 1:
iirc, job owners pay 110% of gas used by keepers. (correct me if it wasn’t 110%)
So if a keeper paid $100 of gas to do a job, he will be paid $110 as fee, earning $10.
If we take away $11 then the keeper will lose $1.
If we make job owners pay $11 more, then it may be too expensive for them to use.
Reason 2:
As keeper market is not widely known/used, it’s important for the protocol to educate or incentivize users to use it. Instead of raising protocol fees, I would say it’s better to keep it low, or even add some incentive to users.
I’m firmly with 0xSato on this one, securing demand & growth should be priority at this stage of project. vKP3R holders currently have lots of additional growth in fees to look forward to yet to come on fixedforex side of things
Go on… 
from lending or other sources?
Growth of existing revenue opportunities, it’s just a matter of ensuring there is enough circulation of the ib*stables for forex exchanges to come on-chain, plus you have OLM which i firmly believe will become a bit of a standard for rewards rather than direct token emissions
Expecting forex trading. This could be the main fee of fixed forex.