IIP-X Proposal for splitting illuvitar IIP into smaller IIPs

[raven minnow]

Simple Summary:
The Council is launching a new pricing strategy for its collection and album features, with reduced prices for standard and mega D1sks.

Overview:
The Council has a new pricing strategy to make its collection and album features more accessible and exciting.

The proposed pricing structure is as follows:
Standard D1sks: 0.005 ETH
Mega D1sks: 0.025 ETH

Rationale:
The rationale behind the new pricing strategy from the council is to increase accessibility and excitement for community members.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1A0-OFjOS_v_6UIZXF81cQ3WRUdc1ECCQfGeH9X-mlb4/edit?usp=sharing

IIP-X Proposal for splitting illuvitar sale into smaller IIPs

Proposal for adding alpha disks

IIP-X Proposal for adding alpha disks
Simple Summary:

The Council is introducing Alpha D1sks to increase excitement and rarity.

Overview:

Alpha D1sks are being introduced to keep customers engaged.

The proposed pricing structure is as follows:

Alpha Standard D1sks: 0.025 ETH (limited to 100,000)
Alpha Mega D1sks: 0.125 ETH (limited to 20,000)

Alpha disks are available for seven days from the start of the sale or until sold out.

Rationale:

By introducing Alpha D1sks the council hopes to engage customers and keep them interested in their collection and album features.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1cc5d-uV0r4BRLH06vO2wogAQBRIGhx4rW3ZwnBv7AIA/edit

Rationale. This way the sentiment of reducing price of illuvitar disks will not force the people to vote yes on alpha disks.

I sadly cannot make more posts in ideas to do the full separation. In the ideal world the marketing disks, launch party, and goals will also be separate. As binding them together prevents the easy way of discussing the concrete changes to smaller portions of the IIP.

What do the <@&814435151307866142> think about the approach of using proven principles, like the Single-Responsibility principle, to have proposals way easier to digest?

IIP-X Illuvitar marketing propsal

Simple Summary:
The Illuvium marketing team has requested D1sks for promotion to make Illuvitars a more sought-after product.

Overview:
Additionally, the Illuvium marketing team has requested 3,000 standard and 600 mega D1sks for promotional purposes, which the council has approved.

Rationale:
Using promotional disks is crucial for boosting engagement and maintaining the success of marketing efforts.

I think that at least while doing the discussion about these topics they need to be separate.

IIP-X Proposal for splitting illuvitar IIP into smaller IIPs

[small blaze]

It would take some getting used to but I can see some merit. We have the balance of splitting up the forums or keeping all discussion in one place. I have a hunch that if we split it up into smaller proposals and they all ran concurrently then discussion would get massively confused across (in this example, 3) different forums and that could cause some headache for not only the council but those trying to give feedback. However with enough future sight and these proposals running separately several days apart it may alleviate that. The problem there is many of the proposals somewhat feed off one another.

Eg alpha d1sks and d1sks pricing are inherintly linked together in every conceivable way. Alpha d1sks can only be analysed when directly compared to the pricing of everything else during the sale. So if they run concurrently they get conflated together anyways and if they run separately then each individual proposal does not make any sense.

[raven minnow]

I think if split most pieces of an IIP will get an overwhelming support and the discussion will get focused where the concern is.

I can bet now, that majority will thumb up a price reduction. And it will not be counted as sentiment for people liking alpha disks.

[small blaze]

Yes but what if we passed a price reduction. And then decided when re evaluating alpha d1sks that our changes would make sense only if the prices were changed for standard d1sks?

[raven minnow]

In the end we can pass them as a package. But during discussion they can be broken down.

As you see we already have passed IIP-24 with different prices, that we're now changing again. So it's not a precedent.

[small blaze]

I feel this is a different premise entirely. But then I need to return again. Say people unanimously think pricing proposal is great. Then we decide we need to change it based on the alpha discussion. Now everyone has to return and change their vote? Do you see how they are inherintly linked

At the same time I imagine there are many examples where this split discussion would work. But I can't really see its success in this context.

[lucid gulch]

While it is tempting to split the topics, I agree with @small blaze that some of these points have to be considered in conjunction. As far as I am concerned, there is a very simple reason why I am totally fine with the new proposal:

Simple maths; for every Alpha disk I buy, if I buy 3 normal ones, then my average weighted price is actually 33% lower than the initially contemplated price per disk. So ppl can still afford to play both the speculation and collection game if that's what they want.

To me it's pretty binary, either 1/we price Alpha disks higher (5x seems fair) or 2/we just get rid of the concept altogether.

If we push for these to be granted to the first minters for the same price, then guess what...they'll still be sold for 5x or more in the secondary market and the DAO would only have captured c. 1.05x of that value.
By pricing it at a multiple in this way, we ensure the DAO captures most of the value in the ST...and am not too concerned about bots either tbh. If some ppl already think that 5x is too excessive, then why would someone take the risk of accumulating too many disks when they don't have the certainty they'll be able to quickly flip at that price. I for one know that I'll either mint an alpha or not but I won't buy it on the secondary market for sure (my threshold is actually already lower than 5x so I won't be buying many alphas).