Dan Romero on Farcaster

Dan Romero pfp

The fundamental problem to solve for with personal tokens / creator coins / etc. is the psychological effect of a significant price decline. 1. Most people are not equipped to manage a liquid, global, 24/7 traded asset. 2. Current norms are that if someone buys an asset, they expect the person / team / organization behind that asset are incentivized long-term to make that asset more valuable. 3. When there's a significant price decline, many / most creators will be overwhelmed by the hole they now need to dig themselves out of. Layer on a bunch of angry, pseudonymous people screaming at them on the internet. 4. Additionally, what happens when you want to stop creating? Like Outdoor Boys recently did. Contrast to a publicly traded company where the founder retires—the value still continues to accrue. Possible ways to change this 1. Invent a new asset that's time bound. Closer to a prediction market or an option. "I'm speculating on X during period Y." 2. Change norms / culture -- this is super slow.

19 replies

55 recasts

449 reactions

Dan Romero pfp

A secondary problem: solve the norms for allowing the creator to sell. Today, if someone behind a crypto asset sells said asset, it's deemed to be "dumping" and a bearish signal. (People tend to ignore if number keeps going up.) In public markets, there are 1) planned sales (10b5-1) and 2) transparency around insider ownership (disclosed in quarterly financials). This doesn't exist in crypto yet (despite a few efforts). Consider two scenarios: a) Taylor Swift does a concert tour and generates $2B in ticket sales from her fans. That's a direct transfer of money from fans to the creator b) Taylor Swift does a concert tour and sells $2B worth of creator coin. Fans can attend the concert if they hold X amount of her creator coin. The increase in demand for the coin provides sufficient increased market cap / liquidity for the creator to realize value. In scenarios A and B, the creator realizes the same amount of value. But in scenario B, current norms make this feel bad, whereas scenario A is normal.

24 replies

10 recasts

155 reactions

Nico.vibe pfp

Can you elaborate on time bound asset?

1 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

Gregarious pfp

I had a token on Rally way back, this was a fundamental problem. The ideal solution: 1. Tokenizes community participation and is a closed ecosystem 2. Tokenizes speculative use cases 3. Rewards 1 with 2, but not the other way around As a creator, you want to know who's participating and engaging and keep those indicators real and meaningful. In a global user base, not everyone can purchase so this keeps community fair and pure. Community can be rewarded with exclusive items or the other token. Those rewards and opportunities also provide more liquidity options to the community members. Laws in the US at least currently make some of the better use cases of a creator token optimal, but to the extent people want to speculate a separate playground is ideal on more fronts. The stigma of selling is minimized when the token is purely for the "meme", speculation, or whatever financial opportunities are presented.

1 reply

0 recast

4 reactions

Push pfp

Loved the hot take, that also confirms money is the issue, or af least it’s fluctuations

2 replies

1 recast

2 reactions

Backseats pfp

Related but to me, the best ways to launch an NFT project is 1) deliver a complete project that gives the user something to do to participate and just step away (Checks is a good example, a complete game) 2) deliver a project that exists for N days where everyone knows the liquidity period for that only exists in that window Both set expectations well. Most things that require a roadmap are doomed

0 reply

0 recast

1 reaction

Koolkheart pfp

@koolkheart.eth

100% agree with the time bound token idea. Predictable scope makes everything saner for both the creator and the speculator

0 reply

0 recast

1 reaction

0xZara.eth🎩 pfp

There’s also a sneaky third boss level to beat here: The early whales who aren’t the creator, scoop up a massive supply early, and then vanish into liquidity the moment the crowd arrives. 🐋💸 They get the bag... the creator gets the blame. And suddenly, it’s not “Taylor dumped” it’s “Taylor scammed.” 😵‍💫 Norms need fixing, but so does the architecture. Maybe creator coins need native vesting for fans too.

3 replies

2 recasts

12 reactions

jesse.base.eth 🔵 pfp

jesse.base.eth 🔵

1 reply

0 recast

2 reactions

Jon Commstark pfp

allow founders the ability to sell their tokens at a discounted rate to another team who can take over the project akin to selling your founder shares to a VC or a larger company aka create exist strategies that can be socially normalized

0 reply

0 recast

1 reaction

Cy Winther-Tamaki pfp

Cy Winther-Tamaki

Only solves a part of the problem, but deploying an agent to manage market making, transparent liquidity management would seem to be a path forward.

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

nick pfp

*takes sip* Bro we should totally launch a launcher together

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

ionspired pfp

I have a solution, I will not tell anyone until I release it 😁

0 reply

0 recast

2 reactions

blade pfp

changing norms is HARD i think you're much better off with tax on volume as revenue along with planned inflation per day

0 reply

0 recast

1 reaction

SerenusSage.base.eth pfp

SerenusSage.base.eth

I think people should announce that they are done with a project and on every single crypto ranking site/DEX & CEX as a legacy token. An option that is added so people who may research can see that it's no longer being worked on. And maybe even a legacy tab so we can look at those projects. Selling an asset/project by the owner should never be seen as bearish or dumping. I understand the reason why. However, it should be encouraged that people who have the passion to move a project to the next level when the OG owner(s) wants out. To me that should so more bullish signs and each token/project should set up governance on what protects everyone from an owner dumping on the coin of they take on new ownership...

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

Ej pfp

not to promote but some of these issues were already addressed by Virtuals protocol with their genesis @virtualsprotocol.eth

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

salinek pfp

I agree with this, many wonderful builders feel pressure because many people try to blame their investment mistakes on the creator, people think that the dev controls the entire supply?

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

De Boy pfp

It would be dumb if me to say I don't understand but at still I don't understand 🤔

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

David pfp

Bring a Farcaster token and I will take the risk

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction