Proposal 007 - Lunar Crystal NFT Sale + Metadata Improvements

By MasterJedi (Foundation Technical Admin) Copyright and related rights waived via CC0.

Disclosure

As a Foundation Technical Admin, the development team (including myself) are paid out of the available funds in the Lunar Treasury. Therefore, I have an active interest in the Treasury being well-funded.

Abstract

The Lunar Foundation proposes that 420 Lunar Crystal NFTs that are in its control be listed on OpenSea to raise additional funds for the project.

The Foundation further proposes an adjustment to the NFT metadata to change the term "Staking Points" to "Power Points", to allow for a more general use of the "Points" system and an opportunity for future Staking clarity.

Motivation

The Lunar Foundation has maintained throughout the transition that the best way for the project to continue, absent outside investment, is to generate revenue in means other than LNR. The original Lunar Crystal NFT mint accomplished this task successfully, generating nearly 7-figures in revenue using Lunar-built software.

As we continue to work to open new revenue streams, Lunar DAO possesses significant quantities of an asset that generates revenue for the DAO without affecting the market for the LNR token.

Putting these additional tokens up for sale provides an opportunity to clarify the current state of the NFTs without repeating previous mistakes.

Rationale

Token Sale

We have assets that don't require swapping LNR to monetize. We should offer those assets for sale at our earliest convenience to keep the Treasury stocked with enough stablecoin to keep the team working.

Metadata Change

The system of calculating staking rewards always felt too complicated. As soon as it was announced and someone built a spreadsheet to calculate the result, it was clear it wasn't fully in line with Lunar's simplicity ethos.

We have some things we want to do in the future that would be based off the Crystal's "power". Instead of basing that power off of a metadata field involving "Staking", which is a very specific feature, we believe that Power should be the basis from which other features are calculated.

Additionally, future "staking points" should be a clear, easy to understand number that is the sum total of all the various factors of the Crystal. That will make future staking rewards calculation (if that feature is offered) significantly clearer.

Analysis

What follows is a breakdown of the different Lunar Crystal NFTs left in the Treasury, their current average list price, and what kind of revenue we could potentially expect at that price.

PLEASE NOTE: The prices included in this analysis are for reference, and the Foundation reserves the right to adjust the list price of any token at any time during the sale.

Conclusions

At current average prices, the Lunar Treasury holds more than half a million ($500,000) USD worth of Lunar Crystals that could be used to fund Lunar Foundation operations for roughly six (6) months at the current burn.

Selling these assets would be highly preferable to selling LNR.

Proposed Changes

1. Change the NFT metadata to replace the "Staking Points" label with "Power Points".

2. Burn the remaining tokens that are locked in the Binance wallet and make them available for re-minting.

3. Transfer 420 Lunar Crystal NFTs to the wallet that owns the NFT contract so the NFTs can be listed on OpenSea for sale.

4. Monitor the sale and transfer the BNB from the OpenSea wallet to the Lunar Treasury wallet at regular intervals.

Pros

1. An NFT sale through OpenSea would drive enough transactions for the Lunar Crystals collection to be officially Verified.

2. Lunar DAO would raise more capital for roughly six (6) more months of Lunar Foundation operations in an LNR-neutral fashion.

3. Lunar DAO would set the NFTs up for future success without confusing new NFT holders.

Cons

1. There are NFT holders, DAO Members, and fudders who will complain about any or all of the following:

   1. "We're spending too much time on NFTs."

      • We shipped *muklthe Portfolio Beta first, so clearly, we're not.

   2. "No one is going to buy more NFTs."

      • They will.

   3. "They're trying to get out of doing staking!"

      • We want to build the feature, but we need a legal review for regulatory compliance across the jurisdictions we operate in, which costs money.

   4. "You're not supposed to change NFT metadata!"

      • The ERC-721 contract standard clearly allows you to update the metadata base URL, which lets you update metadata. We were always going to evolve the Crystals with new details, regardless of what anyone thinks.

2. We will still have to deal with getting our collection unlocked at Binance if we ever want to sell NFTs on that platform.

Steps to Implement

1. The Dev Team will create an execute a script against the NFT database to update the field names for each NFT.

2. The Dev Team will export the NFT Metadata from the database into files suitable for the IPFS system, upload those files to IPFS, and update the NFT contract with the new IPFS baseUri.

3. The Dev Team will then burn the remaining NFTs owned by the Binance wallet and re-mint them to the OpenSea wallet.

4. The Foundation would list each token based on the price ranges above and prepare the listings to go live.

Timeline

• Metadata modifications may require up to 24 hours from the Dev Team.

• Timeline for listing all NFTs would be approximately 5-7 business days after approving this LIP.

Associated Costs

None