SPS Governance Proposal - Adjust Market Fees
Thanks for all of the feedback so far, it seems we can scratch this draft. Message received and I'll be sure to do more extensive community outreach before entertaining these suggestions in the future. You can visit the poll below if you'd like to help share more dynamic and stake-weighted feedback on this topic:
https://peakd.com/hive-104500/@clayboyn/sps-poll-should-we-change-the-market-fees
The purpose of this proposal is to attempt to make the Splinterlands marketplace more sustainable by ensuring that the team gets a percentage of all marketplace transactions for the supporting infrastructure required to operate the marketplace. Currently there is a 6% market fee. 4% goes to the marketplace where the transaction occurs and 2% is burned. This means that while the majority of marketplace transactions take place on third party markets, the Splinterlands company earns nothing unless a card or rental takes place on the Splinterlands website.
Proposal:
If this proposal passes, the market fees will change from 6% to 10%. 4% of each transaction will go to the Splinterlands team, 4% of each transaction will go to the marketplace where the transaction occurs and the remaining 2% will be burned.
Notes:
This proposal was originally suggested as an amendment to the previously passed proposal from @cryptoeater. There is an alternative proposal that is currently running which aims to make the marketplace more sustainable by approaching the problem in a different manner. It is possible to pass both proposals and implement all changes or to pass neither.
Pros:
Ensure the company gets some portion of fees generated by marketplace transactions which should help to offset the expense of operating the marketplace.Standardizes marketplace fees with the Voucher and Grain LPs.
Cons:
Market fees increase from 6% to 10%, which hurts the margins for sellers.
Neutral:
Does not hurt the profit margins on which third party marketplaces are operating.
I fear more fees will equal less overall Tx on the marketplace...
How about instead of increasing the fees from 6 -> 10%... which will yield a 4/4/2 split..
Instead how about we just convert the 2% burn to 2% for Splinterlands?
That way nobody is hurt by the change but the team will receive a benefit.
This seems way simpler and instead of 'yet another fee increase' put off on the playerbase... this will help the team - not as much as proposed... but also not at any further the expense of the Players.
From the initial reaction... I'm assuming that my initial assessment that it was pointless to run that one was correct. We'll see where it shakes out. If people want to run something else we can talk about it. I opened a thread in discord.
10%???? This one is even worse than the 10 DEC listing fee proposal! 6% is already very high. Even the 5% from before was too high. We need to work on reducing the taxes, not increasing them.
Even more than the first proposal, this encourages players to do transactions outside the market, which increases scam risk.
It also opens up for someone to create a third party website that allows people to trade/buy/sell cards for a much lower fee.
100% against this.
I voted for the listing one, but I'm voting against this one. 10% is just too much.
That's fair, I didn't want to run one and not the other. They can both pass, one can pass or neither.
Exorbitant market fees will only reduce trading liquidity.
10% is really too high.
It will only cause players to try their best to trade off-site.
I do like the idea of supporting @splinterlands with transaction fees. What I do not like is the 10% fee. I am not very familiar with NFT trading prices on other blockchains. OpenSea is 2.5% IIRC. What I know from experience is that DEX fees are more than an order of magnitude lower and CEX fees get even lower. It is best if we keep our prices slightly lower than the competition.
I am open to the same idea executed with different numbers. I will vote no for now.
I'm actually curious about the conversation on this one more than anything tbh. I personally felt it was pointless to run this one, but I didn't want to just run the one I thought made more sense...
Technically we could do something like change market fees to 2 company/2 market/2burn or even 4 market/2 company or something along those lines. I guess we'll see if people want to suggest anything else. I personally had no idea the company gets nothing from the majority of marketplace transactions. That's nuts...
I would support either of these changes. Halving what markets earn may not get strong support. 2% company/ 3% market/ 1% burn might be better. I am generally open to any change that make sure both markets and the company are rewarded. I think it would be best if some of the DEC is burned (at least 0.5%).
The idea that we skipped using POLLS to get a general sense of where people were at and get ideas and went straight to a proposal is crazy and just feels like it's wasting people's time and we start ignoring proposals that can be freely posted and avoid the 100k payment ... those that get this free proposal listing should have more oversight and should have to do some sort of poll and more interaction before they end up here.
It seems like I've done more polling than anyone else in regards to Splinterlands. I'd still like to see the team integrate polling on the website so we can get a similar level of engagement/stake as we do with proposals.
The most engagement we've gotten on polls so far is when I forced some onto the website through the proposal system for tournaments, which more or less leads us back to the same place on gathering sentiment with a draft proposal.
You're right though, this one could have definitely benefited from polling for sure. I'll try to set one up tomorrow. Need to think on how best to approach it. Seems people are fine with reapportioning the 6%, but we would definitely need a stake weighted poll to figure out how to run that one. Will take suggestions for what options to poll on in Discord.
If there had been much/any discussion about the number on the other one, I'd have likely ran a poll. From what I saw it was just people for or against, or suggesting things way outside of the scope of the DAO, like Splinterlands charging for API access.
10% fees? rofl. which crypto ecosystem does that. Absolutely joke
Is it just me or one of the most important point is not even mentioned in the proposal?
Assuming this pass and we move to a 10% fee (with 4% going to Splinterlands for each market transaction) ...what is the estimated daily revenue generated for the company? Compared to the average in the current scenario?
ps: I know the number ...just curious why it was not included in the post as it is easily one of the thing people will look at to decide.
When this one started getting brought up, I ran the numbers and came up with about 11k a month, which I personally think seems kind of low considering there would be a 10% tax on all sales. As to what that looks like if we change the fee to 10% (which I personally think is way too high) who knows. It would likely just end up with less market transactions. Not sure the juice is worth the squeeze on this one. As @jarvie suggested though, perhaps a poll would be better for this one.
The main purpose of running this one is simply because I ran the alternative. I can't only run the ones I like/agree with. 10% seems crazy, but this is what people were suggesting. I'll set up a poll tomorrow and see how/if people want to revisit this one by reapportioning the 6% fee that already exists.
É só parar de queimar os 2% e enviar os 6% integral a empresa Splinterlands. Aumentar a taxa? Onde que isso é sustentável?
Not really sure this one is sustainable, seems like it will scale pretty wildly. The alternative proposal is the one I suggested as it seemed more reasonable than this. Ultimately though it's up to the DAO, maybe we don't do either.
É só parar de queimar os 2% e dar a taxa de 6% integral à empresa Splinterlands. Afinal onde que aumentar taxa é sustentável?
10% is a way to much and I will not support this for sure.
No. Nope. Please never ask again. Let us pray that no more proposals to increase costs on us players will ever see the light of day. Amen.
Uh why wouldn't you just go with something more general instead of jumping the gun here. Something like instead of burning 2% it's instead given to the DAO or to the team. Or reduce the 4% given to other market places and instead make it 2% and take 2% for the company. Keeping the general base layer fee the same. I'm almost certain that these other market places take more than 4% and impose other fees do they not? I think it's up to the market place 3rd part to put their own fee on and really that 4% should just be wiped. Or like I said 4% to the company and the 3rd party marketplace slaps the percent they want on top of it for offering the tools and services they do. That feels like the way this market should be working.
Optimal for me would be the following
4% free revamped to...
that 4% Is then split in some way between the DAO and company 2%/2% or however we agree to split it.
Then it's up to the marketplace outside of Splinterlands to add on their own fee they feel is worth the extra tools they provide.
This keeps the current 6% intact and feels like the way it should have been setup in the first place.
Just to be clear, I didn't like this idea, which is why I suggested the alternative may be more viable. That said the feedback seems pretty clear and in line with my thoughts, which were that this would be rejected.
I am going to build a poll based on the feedback and see if people want me to make one to adjust the 6% split differently. will include DAO as an alternative to company on the poll as well.
Keep in mind that he higher the market fees the more people are pushed to trade P2P. More P2P trades means more people get scammed.
Push fees too high and you may even end up incentivizing a completely separate market that aids in bypassing all fees altogether, hurting everyone who benefits from those fees.
Yea this is why I suggested the alternative... 10% fees seemed like a bad idea to me.
Not in favor, for similar reasons to others. 10% is too high and will encourage P2P transactions (or just fewer transactions in general) which is bad.
I would be in favor of changing the 2% burn fee to go to the team instead.
Likely going to link to a poll on this one and just scrap it. I'm against it too, but figured I should run the original suggestion if I ran the other. Clearly should have ran neither...