#SILV 2 continuation post staking.or New SILV3.

1 messages · Page 1 of 1 (latest)

rare panther
#

Creating this thread today to talk about the utility case of SILV in the ecosystem.
I know alot of you are excited for Revenu Distribution and it is definitly a really nice technology I cannot wait to experience. Knowing that Rev.Dis wont be locked I expect most of it will be used like a dividents for cashflow . With that being said I believe that SILV serve the same purpose but with a DIRECT impact of price scarcity without a dump. I Believe stakers and the community surrounding us right now is the most loyal customers we can have , especially if you are still here after this bear market we just survived. My take is since our most loyal customers will be spending in the ecosystem and then dumping the rev.dis why not just keep claiming some SILV . Burning the tokens and therefore answering to the complaints of low price action volatility from the inflated bag we got from staking. It might reduce the rev dis distribution but also a simple click from the dashboard will let you play the game and contribute to the token rising in price instantly instead of waiting for the 500ETH trigger. I myself will be spending in SILV2 to play the game curious to see what is the community approach on if they will play with eth or silv. It will reduce revenue distribution but also pump your bag as it decrease max supply . It opens up alot of opportunity since we can do SILV tournament or special events promoting SILV.

What is the community take on this ?

rare panther
#

I suggest we can even have a ILV or SILV 2 claim on revenu distributions as a starting Idea

timber sable
#

I think there are better ways to do game credit than sILV2 as it currently exists. I think it's a dangerous liability for us to have a tradable token that can change in value as ILV's price fluctuates, because it has potential to severely impact revenue. This isn't just a factor for ILV stakers, it's also a factor for the DAO's treasury.

While I'm against creating any new sources of sILV2, I think that some kind of game credit in exchange for revdis would be fine. If revdis could be credited to a game account at a market rate, and not stockpiled, traded or potentially dumped at inopportune times, it would make a lot of difference in predicting revenue and making appropriate decisions based on those predictions.

rare panther
timber sable
#

Like, yes burning ILV is good, reducing overall ILV supply is good, but it's not a free mechanism. That sILV2 being tokenized means it can be utilized in ways that can cost the DAO more than it needs to.

#

The inverse can also be true of course.

rare panther
#

Wasnt SILV2 never meant to be tradable? And the DAO isnt suppose to trade it?. From what I understand . You think that if ILV is ever worth 1000$ that SILV2 mint at lets say 100$ would be negative for dao? But wouldnt it be also a reason of why it reached that level of scarcity? . Its redemeed 1:1 . The tradable market of SILv2 is not supported by dao anyway

timber sable
#

Well it's an ERC-20, so it's inherently tradable. Intent or not, it was set up in a way where it could be traded.

The DAO doesn't trade it, the DAO burns it when it's spent.

fleet drum
#

Using eth in-game pumps our bags, as the Eth is then used to buy ILV off the market.
Minting sILVx allows less ILV in circulation, but costs us the "buying ILV off the market" pump and revenue for the project at that time.

So, if we do want a deflating ILV token, we would have to make sure it doesn't take away from the revenue of the project to such an extent that the project can't continue building.

  • burning ILV is cool, but you need revenue. and if all potential revenue would only burn ILV, then ILV is worthless because there is no revdis, even if there is only 1 ILV left.
timber sable
#

The DAO also doesn't support liquidity for it, but again, that hasn't remotely stopped it from being traded. Anyone can create a LP at any time, and will do so if there's demand for buying and selling sILV2.

rare panther
#

Also when the market will be overheated . Going from ILV to ETH swap can cost to 100$+ . Limiting acces to ingame revenu because no one with small investment will be able to swap their revenu to play the game. A simple claim and youv funded your runs again.

timber sable
#

Fundamentally what I'm getting at is that if we have 150k sILV2 circulating, we essentially have ~$14M of liability we owe as gameplay or products (approx values around current supply and current ILV price). The problem is that with sILV2, that value scales with ILV's price. If the price of ILV doubles, we have $28M of liability as gameplay or products.

That makes it really hard to predict how much revenue the DAO will actually generate when we have product launches.

If there were to be a big appetite for revdis to be used for gameplay, having the option to claim, for example, $90 of revdis for $90 of gameplay, credited to a game account, that amount no longer needs to scale. We have a much more accurate picture of how much outstanding value exists.

It also seems like a primary consideration here would be avoiding gas fees from swapping. With a revdis claim as sILV2, you'd still be transferring those tokens over to IMX. With game credit, that no longer needs to be the case.

#

By comparison, under the current system, you'd be looking at a swap and a transfer, for 2 gas fees (ILV -> ETH, ETH -> IMX).

rare panther
#

I am trying to find a way to incentives our loyal customer to play by making it easier and cheaper for them to launch their runs as well as using their credit for a burn for the new commers that believe the price action isnt up to par with current market fluctuations( cant blame them if you look at the chart) most of us know it is related to market dillutions . Not the new commers tho

timber sable
#

It's kind of just the same thing. When you issue sILV2, you're issuing game credit that counts against ETH revenue, because people will spend sILV2 so long as it's trading at any kind of discount from ILV's price. That ETH revenue you're no longer generating isn't being used to buy ILV off the market. It's pretty neutral, except you've added liability that can change its' value. I don't see a lot of value there, as compared to just giving game credit.

#

If the premise is that by issuing more sILV2, we'll increase ILV's price more, that premise isn't correct.

#

You could offset some ILV selling, but you're also reducing ETH spending by a proportional amount as that sILV2 is redeemed.

rare panther
# timber sable It's kind of just the same thing. When you issue sILV2, you're issuing game cred...

Except isnt SILV2 removing instantly 1:1 circulating supply on the moment if the mint? Not when its spent. Someone would have tohoard/hold SILV 2 for it to keep value which if it did in ILV the same strat it would eventually be dumped? What is the impact of 1% supply removal on ILV price and what is the impact of Rev Dis pump and dumped at a 75% rate lets say. If you look at dividents stock and especially HIGH yield dividents they stock they are mostly crashing from distribution. A stock giving away divident pumps less because it has to take from its valuation to distribute. The SILV 2 is like if the value goes straight into the compagny valuation instead of being redistributed and dumped

timber sable
# rare panther Except isnt SILV2 removing instantly 1:1 circulating supply on the moment if the...

I kind of think we're talking past each other a bit here.

If ETH revenue is used to buy ILV, which is then distributed (this is literally the revdis mechanism), and all that revdis is sold, there's a net zero change in price. In a simple example, if I buy $100 of ILV, send it to you, and you sell it, how does ILV's price change? If all that revdis were to be claimed as sILV2, it would offset ETH revenue by the price of ILV * the number of sILV2 at the time that sILV2 is spent, reducing revenue and reducing revdis.

#

Notably, the Treasury, which we need to fund to continue to develop our games, only benefits from ETH revenue. The supply reduction from claiming revdis as sILV2 is certainly compelling, but if 100% of revdis were claimed as sILV2, and then spent, generating no ETH revenue, that's not a good scenario for the DAO.

#

Similarly, too much circulating sILV2 is dangerous for the same reason in the event ILV's price increases substantially.

rare panther
#

But if 100% of revenu is claimed as SILV 2 what would be its impact on the ILV token price at the moment of the mint? If we mint 1M SILV2 and reduce max supplies isnt it the same thing for the treasury since all our ILV goes up in price ? What would be ILV price today if the max supply was 8M instead of 9M . I understand the revenu part . Dao wants cashflow for marketing paying employees and all other expense. But if DAO treasury is in ILV and ilv prices goes up from.scarcity isnt it the same for them to just liquidate a bit of treasury as scarcity goes up ?

#

Maybe @unique dirge or Kayn since I know is knowledgable for tokenomics could help me understand better

#

I have been around the token chat alot recently and price action seems to be a concern. A way to fight inflation is deflation/burning mechanism. Trying to find the best solutions.

timber sable
#

If you have a burning mechanism that increases price (by reducing supply), but it offsets revenue, and then you have to sell tokens from the Treasury, you're not really ending up ahead.

#

IMO the main value we could add here is giving people the ability to utilize revdis for gameplay without having to buy/sell tokens and pay gas fees along the way, which at least in theory could be done without sILV2.

rare panther
# timber sable IMO the main value we could add here is giving people the ability to utilize rev...

Thats the type of thing I expect from this tread. Making in game purchases easier . Lets say if you staked only 1000$ you woud not be able to play the game with all the fees incuring during market peaks. I think the people who are hoarding SILV2 are more than likely gonna try to arbitrage it and make money from speculation more than actually using it in game. I was using SILV2 since its the actual in game currency we have right now. If a simple tweak could make it mintable for ingame challenges
Rev dis claimable without taking too much of our team time . Also if the treasury has to sell tokens but price actions goes back to ok price its pretty much as efficient as a token split but with burning mechanism.

Thanks for the exchange @timber sable

pearl pasture
#

thats a good point, silv2 is a liability which value fluctuates with ILV price. if we dont use, and ILV price grows, its gonna be a bigger liability.
i like the idea of a game credit.
can it be fuel?

last skiff
rare panther
# last skiff I agree with <@144974777549848576>. I think you are correct, it would be nice to...

I believe its either cash flow or token appreciation at the EXACT same rate. Having silv2 minted just needs the DAO, if the cash flow expected isnt enough to cover expenses , to sell a portion of ILV token to pay for expenses . But since the value has went up it is exactly the same ROI% no matter when the silv2 is used. Look up how dividents works. You are not getting <<more>> money from divident the value is extracted from the compagnie valuation to pay share holders. On the other end having SILV2 GUARANTEES a price appreciation since rev dis a dumpable assets for all the stakers. Price appreciation will only be dumped by dao if expenses arent match. But bring back price action volatility from the burning there fore solving price Bias/price action concern from new comers.

gusty fjord
urban schooner
gusty fjord
candid dock
#

I like the idea of game credit. It doesn’t have to be silv2 or linked to ilv burning.

#

We can find other ways to stimulate token price. I think revdis is theoretical a great way already for token price, but is yet to be seen. Bringing more players to the project and high revenue is still one of the best ways to price go up. Since it would likely turn investor eyes into ILV

#

I like the burning of ilv it’s a great narrative but I agree with @timber sable

wide moss
#

in an efficient market, buybacks and dividends are the same (barring tax reasons). Crypto is not efficient.

with the current revdis model, ILV labs buys ILV from the market (thereby pumping the price), and redistributes it. Some will dump, but some will keep it, resulting in net positive buy pressure

burning ILV and redistributing sILV does nothing to pump the ILV price, there are almost no rational people who say "oh the supply decreased so this token is worth more" and buy ILV

for reducing max supply to have a significant effect on the price, it will take years. There are so many buy back and burn tokens that are down only. We can't wait years, we will run out of runway

rare panther
pearl pasture
#

token burning is always bullish, altho its effect wont be felt immediately

wide moss
rare panther
pearl pasture
#

maybe we burn some of the ILV bought for revdis

#

that can make our token deflationary

rare panther