TIP-01 Approval of Treasure DAO Tokenomics

Gaarp

Treasure DAO
TIP-01 Approval of Treasure DAO Tokenomic Framework

Summary

Council proposes the DAO formalise the Treasure Tokenomic Framework outlined in the medium article:

https://medium.com/@TreasureNFT/magic-dao-full-decentralization-of-the-treasure-project-ea61544ade55

Rationale

The Treasure Council, with support and passion from the community has achieved a considerable amount in the two months since its inception. Moving beyond its roots as a derivative of Loot, Treasure aspires to become a sprawling ecosystem that connects the metaverse, sitting at the intersection of NFTs x DeFi x Gaming.

From a pure grassroots team, the community led Council has delivered the following key milestones from launch:

Fair Launch

Fair launch of the $MAGIC token via NFT staking (Loot, N, Treasures, AGLD)
Fractionalisation of Treasure Bags (one of the first to do so)
>80% of MAGIC locked in single sided staking contract to earn Legion NFTs
Novel approaches to incentivise LP (as an access key)
Introduced and educated a new wave of users to DeFi

Migration to Arbitrum

Migrated circa 88m MAGIC to Arbitrum via our migration contract (one of the first to actively move from ETH L1)
Creation of hundreds of feature rich and detailed artworks and minting thousands of NFTs on Arbitrum for Treasures, Legions, Rivermen, Numeraires, Seeds of Life and special keys
Generously reweighted Grin and Honeycomb rewards
Announced MAGIC-OHM pair for Arbitrum

Genesis Mine and Life on Arbitrum

First dual staking mine - MAGIC (ERC20) + Treasures (ERC1155)
>76% of circulating supply committed to our Genesis mine for between 2 weeks and 3 months (TVL of ~$33m USD)
#8 liquid pair on Arbitrum Sushiswap with ~$4m in liquidity and weekly trading volume of $4.2m
Market cap on circulating supply >$50m (~$10m on liquid supply)

Soon to be released

First fair NFT ‘governance model’ - only veMAGIC holders and LP can vote where weight of veMAGIC adjusts based on duration of timelock
First all token standard NFT marketplace on Arbitrum
Several key integrations - LIFE, SMOL Brains, Getting Bodied, FUDFarm

The above has been achieved within two months, fully self-funded (~$600k USD) without a cent raised externally, and from a team of free contributors.

In order to scale out and build the Treasure ecosystem, a clear Tokenomic framework is required. It is recommended that the existing framework be actioned.

Proposal

Implement and formalise the existing Tokenomic framework within circa 350m total supply of MAGIC (derived from 1/3 emissions generated from the Treasure Farm):

33% from the Treasure farm fair launch
25% allocated to ‘mining’ under a halvening construct whereby annual emissions reduce by 50% each year
17% allocated to staking and liquidity for liquidity provision, protocol owned liquidity and other staking rewards
15% allocated to the ecosystem fund to be used for growing the Treasure Ecosystem
- 25% of Y1 emissions (or 3,911,782 tokens) have been minted to fund core contributors to grow Treasure DAO
- Allowing the above tokens to be used as required to fund ecosystem growth
- The means through which tokens are liquidated will be proposed and agreed in a later TIP
10% allocated to founding and core contributors
- Circa 10% of tokens emitted at the end of the Treasure Farm have been minted as contributor tokens (or 11,644,017)
- The 11,644,017 will be vested on a 3 month cliff plus 2 month linear basis from the 6th of October (when the Treasure farm ended) where 1/3rd released at the end of month 3, 1/3rd at the end of month 4 and 1/3rd at the end of month 5

Polling Period (CLOSED, QUORUM MET)

The polling process begins now and will end at 13:00 UTC on 7 November 2021. After this, a Snapshot vote will be put up at 14:00 UTC on 7 November 2021.

Vote

For: Current Tokenomics are implemented.
Against: Tokenomics are revised and put up for vote.

Soyboy

I personally would prefer that the vesting period be longer than 3 months. Maybe a workaround could be no cliff (or even more up front) + 12 months vesting instead to incentivize core contributors to stay? Just my 2 cents

allyourcat

Soyboy I clicked "for" a little too enthusiastically but think this is something worth considering, a longer vesting period BUT a larger amount vested upfront, especially to make good on costs/time/effort the team has put in so far!

Viggy

I am 100% opposed to a longer vesting period for the founders and the core contributors. They have already invested over $600,000 of their own personal funds and hold 0 MAGIC currently and have been building faster than any team or project I have been involved with. It seems disheartening to make them wait longer to benefit from the incredible work they have done, while we all have seen 20-50x returns on our initial investments.

I would vote for either keeping the currently proposed vesting period or to completely eliminate the vesting period.

allyourcat

Viggy That's a different matter then, if founders are currently on 0 MAGIC then definitely in agreement with you!

Soyboy

Viggy I get your point, very grateful for all the things they have done. However, on having zero cliff/vest, I don't think this is wise because it offers no derisking mechanisms to new hodlers.

joer

Viggy Agreed with every single word. I've never seen a team doing so much in such a short period of time. Personally I wouldn't feel ok if the team isn't compensated after all these months hustling non-stop. I believe that in order for Magic to succeed; the team has to be incentivised properly and we the community should look after that.
I would even remove the vesting altogether.

I genuinely trust the team. Genuine people, hard working, smart, fun and ambitious.

Voting for "current tokenomic framework is implemented".

See you in the Magic verse.

Viggy

allyourcat Yea, founders currently hold 0 MAGIC, have launched all the NFTs (Treasure and Legions) as a completely free launch and have been doing an incredible amount of community building in the back end that the community is still to see.

I get @Soyboy 's concern but logically thinking about it, the people who have been building for 2 months straight, released everything free and invested $600,000 arent going to sell their holdings, crash the market and leave with a 2x return at most. It would be such waste of time and effort and community that isnt easy to replicate.

angrypc

I understand the points made re: vesting for founders. I'd still feel more comfortable with a longer vesting period as it signals longer term commitment. Maybe find a balance? 1/3 vested immediately and the rest vesting over ₁₂ months?

sumtem

I’m 100% okay with the proposed vesting periods, or even none at all. One thing to remember is that this is only the vesting proposal for the first chunk of $magic emitted in the treasure farm. When the first farm initially started there wasn’t even a vesting period for the 10% of emitted $MAGIC that was going to the team. It was just, 10% of emitted $magic going to them and that was that, it was a free, fair mint project and the community was pretty fine with that. There is going to be another 2/3 to emit which we can propose extended vesting periods for. This first chunk not being vested super long helps the team get back the 600k capital they deployed and then some as a little payment for their extremely hard work.

The team has already pretty much had 0 access to the emitted $MAGIC from the initial farm already, so they almost have even kind of vested/had the $MAGIC locked since the start of the first farm 2 months ago. Adding another 3 months makes it 5 months total; more than fair to me considering they have been totally great and worked insanely hard these past 2+ months. They’ve shown they deserve their payday. Happy to go with their proposal.

Treasure_Alex

100% with you @sumtem and @Viggy . The team has invested a lot of their personal time and a significant amount of their private Funds (600k). They simply just deserve to get access to their tokens, because it’s the right thing to do so. Nevertheless I truly believe that the team will continue working with the same drive, passion, pace and quality in growing the project. Let’s put the trust in them from the beginning and ride this wave together!

Viggy

Its honestly quite simple for me. This team has worked tireless for 2 months and given me a 40-60x return on my original investment. I am going to choose to trust them and don't want to hold them hostage. I think creativity and effort stems from a need to build and contribute and see a slice of the world be what you dreamt, not because we are withholding their payment for what they built from scratch already.

Why choose to distrust and project a worse case scenario onto a team that has already built and given away so much for free. This is not to say that I think people who want a longer vesting period are mistrusting of the team - I completely understand the rationale behind it and appreciate it and think its prudent (we shouldn't really trust internet strangers, right). But, in my world view, builders don't stop building and dreamers don't stop dreaming.

DetailOriented

I am 100% in agreement that we should let the team vest fast in this 1/3 tranche. It is essential to make them whole, reward the leadership that has generated community value and incentivize them to create even more value that we all will share in as owners, managers, and members of the DAO. It's simply the best investment that we can make in our own success. Please vote FOR this proposal.

MachuPichu888

Fully in agreement with Viggy. The Team gets paid, everybody gets paid bottomline.

_X_

I think we go ahead with it. It is only effectively ratifying the arrangement that we were already expecting and had become used to. I think the team deserve the backing for producing what they have, the speed at which it was produced and the personal risk they took. I'm also convinced that they are committed to continuing to build and haven't done or said anything that would endanger that trust.

0x_hodl

I agree with this proposal and voted "aye". I trust the team and they should be compensated for their efforts. I've seen and lot of rugs, and a lot of projects where the devs just silently fade away after payday, I don't see any of those characteristics here.