Motivation
The tokenomics aspect of WINR is, undeniably, its most significant area for improvement, even though the project holds considerable promise and uniqueness. The proposal is aims to offer solutions that can enhance the present situation and strengthen WINR’s position as an innovator, while also making its token a more attractive investment option.
Why now?
There have been valid concerns regarding the minting of WINR and vWINR that have generated a significant amount of FUD circulating on Twitter and the Discord channel, attracting considerable negative publicity to the project. This adverse PR can be transformed into a positive catalyst by implementing prompt and decisive actions.
Background
The tokenomics documentation for WINR indicates that around 40% of the supply is in the hands of the team and early investors, subject to a notably aggressive linear monthly vesting schedule. For brevity, I’ll overlook specific details like the six-month cliff for team tokens and the vWINR minting process, which allows conversion to WINR after some months. Despite these complexities, the overall minting schedule still results in significant monthly selling pressure. This is particularly impactful during a crucial phase for young projects: the early bull market.
The best counter examples would be projects like Celestia, which have managed to see their token price rise even while airdropping to the community. They have roughly timed their vesting schedule to start in the middle part of the bull market, thereby minimizing early sell pressure. This approach is partly why we’re witnessing numerous airdrops currently, as teams are aligning their vesting schedules to more favorable market conditions.
Proposed Solutions
We must make distinction between two groups:
- Team (insiders, partners, advisers, marketing)
- Early investors / core contributors: they purchased 17.5% of the supply for 1 million USD (asked on Discord), which would mean a price of almost 0.006 USD per token
I will propose a separate solution for each group.
Solution 1 - insiders
Upon discussing in the Discord channel, it became clear that the team has a leeway of at least 2-3 years and they are staking their vested tokens.
Considering the leeway and that the team is not interested in selling to fund the project, adding a 12 - 18 months cliff from now or changing the linear minting rate to an exponential one would be a great improvement - this should be discussed more with the community.
Additionally, early in the lifetime of the project, it would be advised that the team does not stake their significant portion of the vested supply to avoid diluting the rewards and bring more users. Therefore, either locking them up or adopting an exponential rate becomes even more logical.
Solution 2 - early investors
To avoid a scenario where the tyranny of the majority dictates outcomes, this part of the proposal suggests that only early investors should have the right to vote on this solution. This approach is designed to prevent any unfairness and ensure that the voices of those who have been with the project from the beginning are adequately represented and influential in decision-making.
In terms of vesting, this approach would be similar to the previously discussed solutions, like introducing a cliff period or changing the minting rate, with the significant distinction being the voting process, where early investors have exclusive rights to decide.
Expected Effects
Addressing the current negative attention on social media with a quick, community-driven solution could significantly improve the perception of the project. Demonstrating that it operates on decentralized principles and is responsive to feedback emphasizes the strength and involvement of its community.
Implementing even just one of the proposed solutions could effectively transform the negative public relations into a positive narrative. It would showcase the project’s commitment to adaptability and its willingness to engage with and act upon community input.
This approach not only addresses immediate concerns but also builds trust and credibility, vital for long-term success and growth.
Conclusion
To conclude, the valid concerns that have led to the negative attention the project is currently receiving can be swiftly transformed into a positive catalyst. Prompt and strategic action is key to achieving this turnaround.
With more adoption, the token will gradually become deflationary but it is important to first make it appealing for mass adoption to achieve this long term goal.
Such an approach will not only address and improve the arguably weakest aspect of the protocol but will also pave the way for its success.