We would love feedback around allowing alternative asset volume to be counted towards total platform volume. Any ideas around how this would be implemented, or pros and cons is appreciated.
Our stance is that there are many reputable tokens with strong communities that should be able to benefit from the incentive program.
COSG, ALC, Finite for example. $COOP $PEPE $USDC $PRSMS etc.
We would like to count these tokens volume at their equivalence in Algo if traded.
Finally, we have also suggested outsourcing elements of the decision making process for reward distribution to the GEMS based Governance.
We think this is a great way to get our community involved and improve the reward review process.
This would put distribution sign-off of NFT Reward funds to vote of GEMS stakers. This is something we would like to work towards this year if it has your support.
On the GP10 plan itself, it’s simple and its rewarding for creators and NFT traders so no complaints there.
On the topic of alternative assets - that’s a long one!
I am strongly in favour of allowing and counting NFT sales in ASA tokens. If someone is willing to pay asa (lets say COSG) for nft and if there is someone on the other side willing to sell it for that same COSG - then clearly this is what market wants, why not support giving extra utility to proejcts with tokens that want to push that narrative?
Here is our own story of trying to do sales in ASA and i hope some people can relate to it and see why excluding sales in non-algo ASAs from NFT incentives is legit middle finger to projects that also have token:
Having NFT sales done in our native token COSG was in our whitepaper since day1. It’s what makes sense in our vision for the Cosmic Champs ecosystem. It gives our token extra utility but it also rewards our token holders for sticking with the project, earnign the token thrugh staking and other incentives and allowing them to play to “own” after they accumulated enough rewards in game. It also helps us to soak extra cosg form the market and keep its scarcity - read, its all part of tokenomics.
both of our nft shuffles(first and second season) were held in COSG (thank you for supporting sales in cosg @algogems and also @examarket) were a huge success, selling out in under a day - with a pretty significant volume. (i don’t have numbers at hand, but nftexplorer shared them at one point - we were #2 asa for nft sales in non-algo currency (behind usdc - which is more widely accepted and used) and miles ahead any other token (i believe 3rd one was algoleagues token)). So clearly this is something community can get behind…
We are basically in the top3 NFT projects on algorand by volume in 2023(mngo #1, Mostly frens & Cosmic Champs are like 20k algo appart (880 - 850k algo), followed closely by algoanna) - this is if we go by volume that includes COSG sales done for our season 2 shuffle(that happened early in 2023) on nftexplorer (which conventiently stopped tracking our sales in cosg sometime later( fyi our sales in cosg after that point are not insignificant, adding them on top of tracked volume would push us higher in the leaderboard - probably). Regardles even if we ignore sales done in COSG as majority of secondary sales is in algo anyway, we are still in the top 6 projects just by secondary sales in algo (500k-ish)…) e.g. we are doing more volume in COSG that many other projects do in their lifetime.
Ever since we stopped trying to push for COSG sales, because we actually want to offer our community the benefits of the NFT incentives (thats why they are there, to engage NFT community and creators) we’ve been frequently in the top3 weekly NFT project by volume(whenever we held an event that included some sales we were #1)… point of this “rant” is we have to hurt our tokenomics and our plan for our token, simply because if we don’t participate in these incentives then we are not competitive with other proejcts that get free algos (sounds remarkably simmilar to defi incentives doesnt it?)
We’ve also postponed our season 3 of NFTs that was planned for 2023(even though it’s made fully already) in hopes of getting some changes introduced to the NFT incentive program so we could actually benefit from the incentives, but nope(i know for a fact that this topic was brought up by algogems team, two periods back)
TLDR: We would love to get some support in trying to do our own thing and help grow ecosystem, NFT crowd is a huge part of that, NFT projects that remained active and kept building during bear are very few left and if someone wan’ts to use COSG or ALC or COOP or whatever to buy their NFT’s to show support to the community gathered around the token, they should be welcome to do so, and not penalized for it.
Thank you all for attending my talk.
Disclosure: i’m cofounder of Cosmic Champs so i am biased AF, also some numbers i throw around could be outdated because i’ve stopped tracking them while back…
I see the free mint to add new users. But I would add more opportunities to onboard more people through contest, reaching out to outside communities for limited partnerships. This would actually be great time to give nft communities from outside Algorand a chance torelease their collection on our chain through your platform. Keeping it more relevant and more chances of success with value added instead of releasing NFTs that could be useless after the contest.
I really like where GEMS is going with this. Very unique offering!
I think the NFT communities would massively benefit if the only value that counted was meme coins such as $COOP $PEPE $USDC $PRSMS $FAME. I have a nice bag of COOP and PEPE i’d love to use.
I would also like that, but not sure who are in charge of doing it happens, it would be amazing if the primary sales of Cosmic Champs can be done in COSGs and getting its volume in Algo.
I think counting sales from community tokens is a no brainer and should be allowed.
Unless something changes, its pretty clear the rules are really just suggestions so I would recommend counting them as its a big part of what the algo gems community has been asking for and you know is the right thing to do!
Please consider taking away Algogems NFT rewards and giving them to Rand instead.
It will go much further with a team that has shown they can reliably support the ecosystem across multiple reward phases. Algogems just doesn’t do anything for the ecosystem at this point.
Stats:
7-day volume: $15.85 (2 people traded)
30-day volume: $155.22
You realize that gems data isn’t properly tracked pretty much anywhere ESPECIALLY DAPPRADAR? (and AF is aware of that) but gj showing your ignorance.
(if they didn’t have equal share with lets say shufl they wouldnt have been included in the NFT rewards program)
still by my information not 100% accurate but to give you an idea(as this was used for the NFT rewards allocations calcs)
Word of advice stop using dappradar as your go-to metrics tool if you are gonna track algo stuff, perhaps use ALGO native tool like chaintrail - it is a lot more accurate for an example. But you do you, peace
Here is our MVP for a data tracker that provides full transparency. Data Analyzer (algogemsnft.github.io)
We still have to integrate Fusions, Pack # of NFTs, Minting txns, and most importantly sales in alternative currencies converted to Algo value at time of sale. Chaintrail.io has made efforts to improve their tracking, they are the best 3rd party source of truth. They are working with us to track Packs currently.
Just want to point out that GEMS is really transaprent, and unlike others like R& are not allowing cheating to happen all over the place and out in the open. The NFT rewards program has been ran extremely poorly, and the idea that GEMS got so little rewards when they are clearly doing a lot more to protect the rules is disgusting.
!
