I love this proposal. The implications for our game are positive for so many reasons. I truly hope everyone involved with Splinterlands takes the time to understand why, if they don't understand already. Its HUGE!
For those that asked:
1/2 the DEC from all sales go to the DAO where they are either a) used to give value to SPS or b) burned to eliminate the DEC from the economy. Both are super positive for SPS.
by aligning the community's finances (ie the DAO) with the success of Rebellion pack sales, it will create more incentive for players to promote the sale.
1/2 the sales will NOT go to the team, this means that the team will have to operate leaner in the future so that they are successful. Operating lean is a good way to make sure you are efficient and spend your money wisely, a goal I think we all have if we want to see the game go to the next level.
1/2 the sales will NOT hit the economy in the short run at least because the DAO is unlikely to sell their DEC received. So even if the DEC is not burned (which I imagine there will be some burned at some point), then the DAO will control a large % of the sales and be able to protect the economy.
This model is BOLD and revolutionary. In fact, I would say that if we succeed, then every competitor in the space will be both envious and try to replicate it. Which is NOT EASY.
This! Of every proposal we have ever had, this one is by far the easiest yes for me! I'm super super pumped. The benefits to us the players, the DAO and the economy are riddiculous, I am confident we will this will be a real PEG tester!
This is a massive win for decentralization! I have not see a single blockchain gaming developer offering to give up 50% of the revenue like this. $250,000 price tag is a steal IMO.
Which are good reasons? Elaborate please
I added 5 points to my comment above so you can see it there David.
Honestly, this really smells like desperation not a hey we love the community so we want to give away our profits.
I understand the team basically has no money at this point and the DAO is being used to float their business expenses. Fine, this is a must in order to have splinterlands continue to exist. That said, this should be treated like a business loan not a profit share imo.
Further, these stables that the team wants to be paid with are the only 'real' assets the DAO has. If we get rid of them, the only way the DAO can fund outside activity such as promotional partnerships, further development of third party tools (like peakmonsters), etc is to sell off the DAO's SPS/DEC for fiat/stables which will hurt the price of those tokens.
Obviously everyone has their own interpretations as to their motives.
On the expenses, you either believe Yaba or not when he says he has enough runway for 5 to 6 months.
If you think both of the points in your first 2 paragraph, then I don't think number 3 is much of a consideration. If you don't really mean what you said in the first 2 paragraphs, then my answer would be that in order for the DAO to ever have any meaningful money to help the game, then the game's assets have to be of value. Otherwise the small amount of stables we have are meaningless in the bigger picture.
I really don't think they have the funds to be honest. I think they have a ~6 month runway but that isn't a runway where they are still okay with cash, that is a 'we are operating with massive debt and taking our final breaths'. I have a feeling the 6 months is when we would need to file for bankruptcy/restructuring etc and Splinterlands is done.
Yes, the game assets will need value for the DAO to be meaningful but as of today they are not. If the DAO liquidated, the token prices would plumet and likely never return. As such, the DAO really can't 'afford' to be using its SPS/DEC to be buying stables as that would exude sell pressure.
That leaves us in a position where the stablecoins are the DAOs only 'current' tool. While we are still in a bear, SPS to pay promotions, partnerships, etc is not an option. One day sure, SPS might have enough 'real' value to be able to exchange and not cripple the market but we are not there.
I think this type of action is fine in the future but right now it again seems like a really poor time to be trying to be innovative and groundbreaking with how we operate.
Further, when the market is in a better place to take such groundbreaking steps, I again think this should be a set contract fee and not a profit share. If we are 'hiring' the company to development that is it, they develop, we reap the sole rewards. They are wanting their cake and to eat it too.
Thanks for the reply and we will find out in the future just where everything stands. I'm obviously a bit more optimistic than you, but we will both find out together in the future!
Same question as @davideownzall - please elaborate apart less risk for SPL as company
I posted 5 points above for you Uwe!