RE: Revamp Market Fees to Include 2% DAO Royalty
You are viewing a single comment's thread:
It will be beneficial to your bottomline in the long run, because this can potentially kill your competition :)
I am sorry to state it like this, but this is a fact. Also you do receive Hive DHF funding, while your competitors don't. So losing a bit of revenue shouldn't be much an issue from your point of view.
I use PKM, and I also use your competitors. As a consumer, I do not like monopoly. I like competition. That is the only way the consumer benefits. This proposal potentially kills competitors of Peakmonsters. This is NOT a good thing from a player/consumer point of view.
0
0
0.000
K let's find a compromise what is the split that you think would be good because it is very much not ok that listing is not rewarded. So let's think it through what is the split? I am fine with not having 2% go tot the dao that seems like too much. Also I think splinterlands API servers deserve to be compensated.
3/1/1/1
2.5/1.5/1/.5
Let's find a compromise because because do you think it's fair that half the equation of work doesn't get compensated for building tools?
No, Jarvie. This is simply not needed at all.
Let me ask you a different question. Do you think DAO is under funded? I think not. Another SPS mini-pack late next year (2024) will be enough the fund the DAO.
Yes I wouldn't have chosen 2% for DAO it is too much for dao... I can understand effort to reduce supply of DEC and personally i lean towards DAO over burn.
But i think listing tools need to be rewarded (and yes we expect that means lots more sites will compete against us for something they've never had an incentive to create and that's fine)
Also I think splinterlands API servers for markets are basically a charity and need to be rewarded.
So let's tweak the numbers and come up with a compromise.
I like to hear from your competition directly.
yes me too... because i think they're totally smart enough to figure out how to turn this into their advantage... sounds like everyone is thinking they'll just do nothing at all and are just done ever building more features.
I'd love to hear what split they'd like to see as a compromise.
I would also love to hear what split others propose. For context, this 6% fee was derived based on a starting assumption of a 2% royalty to the DAO, then simply 1% taken from markets and 1% taken from players.
The 2/2/2 split seemed logical as I personally believe a listing frontend is just as important as a buying frontend, and if the Splinterlands team ever needs funding they can simply make a DAO proposal for it, which is also why I chose to distribute to the DAO rather than burning (which was my original plan for the proposal but leaves no flexibility for the funds).
Instead, what I propose: 3rd party tool/market providers make their own case. Not you.
Although you are a 3rd party, but I think your funding situation is better because of hive DHF funding, which is providing your dev capital for years.