Curation Funding (Curation Game Feature)

Platform
#1
  • What is Curation Funding?
    • Curation funding is (ideally) the incentive mechanism built around Curation Game. In our current model, we hold all the risk of a drop by own all of the costs, and brands receive ROBOT regardless of how well the drop performs. With Curation Funding, the cost would need to be collateralized in ROBOT as against the drop. This allows individuals, DAOs, etc to selective invest their ROBOT on the drops they believe in, with the upside holding ROBOT rewards, and downside reducing their ROBOT put up for collateral.
  • How it works?
    • !We offer production, listing, shipping, etc to launch the branded product!
    • How much funding is needed?
      • !Min 150% of our Production cost ( to cover team expenses and break even)
    • How does funding work?
      • You use your ?ROBOT? as collateral against the drop.
      • :part_alternation_mark:Level 1 No Rewards, Some Cost taken out
        • OR If less than 150% of COGS are sold, then costs are subtracted out of collateral
        • OR If any stock is left over then the costs are taken out of then collateral is covered
      • :robot: Level 2 Some ROBOT Rewards for funders
        • After 150% of Cogs are covered, Some (variable depending on sales volume) amount of $ROBOT is offered as profit to funders. No collateral is taken out
      • :thought_balloon::rocket: Level 3 ROBOT + Other TBD Rewards
        • At X%? of profit/ sales, a USDC streaming is unlocked.
        • Info TBD :zipper_mouth_face:
  • Why do we need this?
    • We are delivering far more value to our partners then receiving. Our exchange is not equal and we hold all the risk. This would allow a brand to own some accountability (along with a better incentive model) to ensure their drop is successful. As some of our drops in the past have proven, if they’re not putting anything on the line, they often don’t show up to do their best work.
  • When does it apply?
    • !All the time, for any drop, partner, yada yada.
      • If METAFACTORY REALLY wants a drop, then we just stake/ collateralize our funds.
      • !No drops should be made with out commitment of funds!
  • Versions
    • V1- an MVP with brands, manual multisig, tracked from there
    • V2- Contracts written, potentially available in other tokens(partners), 1 pager for community, larger roll out for all drops, ?connection to shopify?
    • V3- User interface, connection to drops pipeline/ERP
    • V4- Launches with curation game…

The wording is messy, but I made a Meme instead

6etgwf (2)
6etgwf (2)497×678 88.4 KB

6 Likes
#2

How will people know production costs upfront? There’s a lot of work that goes into a drop before we know production costs, I imagine we’d want this stake sooner than that. I feel like it would be best to have some preset options

#3

Well that’s one of the things we need to get better at figuring out. We can’t have drops where we figure out the costs last minute, then are surprised when they don’t work out.

It would need to be approximate, but we should start by finding a producer and getting an quote. We already have a pretty good list of producers we can get quotes from, Only 15% of our products would be outliers, which we can build better data for.

Ideally, we overshoot our assumptions and can always give extra back after.

#4

I really like this model, we can fine tune it as we go, but it makes sense that our partners share the upside if the drop does well and also the downside if it doesn’t. It will incentivize them to do their best job (in terms of promoting the drop, thinking about reasonable quantities to produce, etc.) and it will filter for those communities and brands that are really interested in collabing with us.

2 Likes
#5

This seems like a great way to ‘paper test’ the curation game mechanics, while also creating better alignment between MF and our partners. We can look at past drops and generalize the ask vs. needing a hard 150% of production. In fact, from a partnership perspective, it might be better for the ask to be more generalized (reflective of a series of drops vs. needing to recalibrate for each one).

#6

LFG

Talking off line with @DamagedGoods the vibe I was getting was Kickstarter + Revenue Sharing

Thinking through this from my POV (Looking to do a Crypto Board Game)

  1. I have the game all designed and ready to go
  2. I bring that design to MF
  3. MF is hyped
  4. We begin the funding phase

question:
How do we get the word out that funding rounds are active?

  1. Funding round is complete (optimistically overfunded)

Could there be stretch goals? Like if we get X+Y Robot the you get a digital version?

  1. What determines the levels?
  2. Game gets produced
  3. Three outcomes
    a. Sells like crazy - Everyone gets lots of robot
    b. Sells ok - People get their robot back
    c. sells terrible - People lose their robot

Does that sound right/make sense?

1 Like