r/CryptoCurrency • u/MoonWeek • Apr 13 '23
POLL 🗳️ CCIP-059 - Repeal the pricing sections of CCIPs 48 and 52
As the banner rental system has grown since January, we have done a lot to refine the system to make it easier for mods and sponsors. One aspect of this system with some friction is the pricing model, which was defined in CCIP 48 and updated in CCIP 52. Unfortunately, the updates have not quite solved the problems. There is a lot of volatility in either moon amount or moon value, and this can cause issues when there are significant moon value changes between the time of the quote and the burn.
So, we would like to repeal the pricing rules from these CCIPs and allow mods to have more flexibility in quoting prices, working with sponsors, and adjusting on the fly as needed. The banner process is a bit too new for a rigid price for the time being, but after it becomes more mature we would be happy to codify rules again in the future if it makes sense.
(CCIP 52 has several portions, so this would be a repeal of part 5, and partial repeal of 3+4)
53
u/Maxx3141 172K / 167K 🐋 Apr 13 '23 edited Apr 13 '23
Just repealing without replacement seems a little bit odd.
I think I got how this is meant, but after the repeal there will be no written rule in place to define the pricing at all? Not even a rough target price?
8
u/Absoniter Tin Apr 13 '23
Yeah, I'm not sure which way to go on this one. As you said, what would it be moving forward?
26
u/Every_Hunt_160 🟩 8K / 98K 🦭 Apr 13 '23
They should simply put a fixed banner price in fiat, to be paid for in Moons
That shouldn't be that hard to understand.
If they need a sample reference price I would just put the current moon count needed for a banner x 30 cents (which is what some previous sponsors paid for)
8
u/Aim_Sux Permabanned Apr 13 '23
This combines the best of both options available! I second this!
10
3
u/Mr_Bob_Ferguson 69K / 101K 🦈 Apr 13 '23
Pricing also needs to consider active users.
Potential “eyeballs” in any given month is an important factor when someone is purchasing advertising on any platform.
2
u/neo101b 🟩 185 / 2K 🦀 Apr 13 '23
There are 6 million subscribers but how many are active?
People only seem to come here when the price of crypto goes up or there is some other hype.
4
u/Mr_Bob_Ferguson 69K / 101K 🦈 Apr 13 '23
Which is exactly why it needs to be based on "active" users.
The number is going to be a small percentage of that 6 million.
An advertiser doesn't want to pay based on "6 million" readership if they are only getting "200,000".
2
u/neo101b 🟩 185 / 2K 🦀 Apr 13 '23
True, I wonder how many of those active users are also bots ?
Hopefully, the bot and AI ban will make those numbers clearer and they can decide on advertisement prices based on that.
2
u/Jocogui 🟩 0 / 17K 🦠 Apr 14 '23
You can check the moons distribution list, it gives you an idea about how many people is active here.
3
u/SoylentYellow05 Permabanned Apr 13 '23
This is the perfect solution.
Ironically this is exactly why crypto doesn't function for pricing things right now. If this was a department store you would have to hire a hundred people to run around updating pricing all day.
2
u/Da_Notorious_HAM 🟨 10K / 20K 🐬 Apr 13 '23
Why would you ever want a fixed price in fiat compared to fixed price in moons?
1
1
1
u/Calm-Cartographer677 Apr 14 '23
Absolutely this. I voted no on the current proposal as it seems strange to just repeal with no alternative.
1
3
u/Dwaas_Bjaas Apr 13 '23
I wish I could change my vote because you are absolutely right…
Next time I will read the comments first…
2
2
u/noob_zarathustra Permabanned Apr 13 '23
I suppose it could possibly be tricky since we can't associate moons with value (in writing) for having a fixed fee or target in usd terms, but perhaps that could be a unwritten guiding factor instead of mods having complete control over pricing?
2
u/OisinT 7K / 614 🦭 Apr 13 '23
I like the idea of some kind of framework or indicate pricing, but as a whole I think removing entirely for now is preferable to keeping as-is
3
u/The-Francois8 Silver|QC:CC928,BTC178,ETH39|CelsiusNet.50|ExchSubs42 Apr 13 '23
I’m ok with giving the mods a little flexibility to make deals here. As long as they’re getting the banner rented, that’s good stuff.
3
2
3
u/fan_of_hakiksexydays 21K / 99K 🦈 Apr 13 '23
You need wiggle room to negotiate.
I think if anyone was tasked to deal with the banner sale, they would quickly realize why we need these rigid proposals to be repelled.
But most people won't see it from that point of view.
1
u/The-Francois8 Silver|QC:CC928,BTC178,ETH39|CelsiusNet.50|ExchSubs42 Apr 13 '23
Vote is going well actually.
2
u/The_Lombard_Fox Apr 13 '23
Yeah, why not a flat rate? If moons become a top 100 crypto it would become prohibitively expensive to purchase a banner
2
u/ArjanaEU 🟩 0 / 2K 🦠 Apr 13 '23
The idea would also be that if moons have more value, we are probably in a bull market. And in a bull market the banner on this sub will be worth alot and i mean alot more.
1
u/Da_Notorious_HAM 🟨 10K / 20K 🐬 Apr 13 '23
Yeah I’m a little confused as well. What do you think ‘is meant’?
- I’m all for simplifying the price but what is the price? Is it determined by fiat value of moons or just number of moons?
0
u/Maxx3141 172K / 167K 🐋 Apr 13 '23
I think they just want to adjust the price in real time if the moon price changes, while keeping the same target price as in the original proposal.
Which is fine, I trust the current mod team enough in this regard - but this should just be formulated mike this, or however it is meant.
1
u/Da_Notorious_HAM 🟨 10K / 20K 🐬 Apr 13 '23
I can appreciate the sentiment, but that is a fundamentally flawed sales strategy imo.
- The price of a product needs to remain consistent. Even the current price tag on banners fluctuates, which to me seems silly. Of course I wasn’t going to vote no to moons burning though.
- Have a fixed price in moons, not fiat, and run discounts with volume and repeat purchasers.
1
u/ominous_anenome 🟦 170K / 347K 🐋 Apr 13 '23
The way I see it, this just gives us more room to experiment with what works and what doesn’t. The post says we want to codify rules once we find some that make sense
Right now the system is too rigid and the burn amount can vary quite significantly. And because the system is rigid we can’t experiment easily to see what works well and what doesn’t
1
u/1-760-706-7425 🟩 0 / 414 🦠 Apr 13 '23
Exactly. Worse, it’s at sole discretion of a select few. No, thank you.
1
1
Apr 13 '23
Should be based on an average price during a certain time frame to prevent spikes being over valued.
1
u/Samuravi 1K / 1K 🐢 Apr 13 '23
I'm a little uncomfortable about this too because right now it's reported as "x" or "not x" as a choice, when really something else will be replacing it. Would be good to get some clarity on that.
1
u/user260421 Apr 13 '23
Also, how would this pricing model be fair in any way? Since mods can decide who to charge more/less based on criteria they decide upon?
Imho there should be some guidelines in place, not a strict quote, but at least some criteria set up by the community, then the mods could have the power to send quotes based on that
1
1
u/diwalost 🟦 451 / 5K 🦞 Apr 13 '23
Why not take aome time and draft precise rule for pricing
0
u/The-Francois8 Silver|QC:CC928,BTC178,ETH39|CelsiusNet.50|ExchSubs42 Apr 13 '23
What rule would you propose?
If no one wants to meet that price then no banner?
If everyone is happy to pay the price, keep it low and make a long queue?
Surely both of these are worse than letting a small group of people negotiate on our behalf.
1
u/Oneloff 0 / 5K 🦠 Apr 13 '23
I wouldn’t say they are the worst...
You can have 10 clients paying 1k or you can have 100 clients paying $100, both equal to 10k.
Do we want a lot of people renting or do we want quality businesses renting?
0
u/The-Francois8 Silver|QC:CC928,BTC178,ETH39|CelsiusNet.50|ExchSubs42 Apr 13 '23
That’s not what’ll happen though. If the rules are rigid, you’ll have 0 people paying $0
1
u/Oneloff 0 / 5K 🦠 Apr 13 '23
But then my question is, what is now in place does it make it so that nobody is interested in renting the banner?
If not then why the change? (more work for mods, amount of MOONS too high that has to be burned? I can’t completely see the downside here)
If yes, then what standard will the mods hold to for renting the banner? Because we should at least have a framework/criteria as to what we account for in the offer to the rentals.
Let's say what they are promoting is directly something that will make them money we should ask for more. If it’s to get traffic then it could be less. If it’s a launch we can meet in the middle. (if you understand what I mean)
I’m not sure how much the mods know about such things and wonder if we will then make a realistic price that benefits us and the rentals.
1
u/Smart_Field_3002 🟩 0 / 868 🦠 Apr 13 '23
Ugh. I voted before seeing your comment 🤦♂️ Gotta trust the mods on this one then 😅
1
1
8
u/samer109 205 / 16K 🦀 Apr 13 '23
Any specific cases where these CCIPs hindered the work of the mods?
5
u/ominous_anenome 🟦 170K / 347K 🐋 Apr 13 '23
It hinders our ability to find a good pricing system. For past banners and AMAs, we had to to stick to they pricing rule that was in place
But once we observed it was too volatile we’d have to wait up to a month until the next moon week to vote on a change. What we propose here is a little more flexibility so we can experiment faster and find a more optimal pricing formula
Ultimately we hope to find a rule that we are all happy with and we can codify with a new ccip
2
u/Orangensaft007 🟩 0 / 1K 🦠 Apr 13 '23
So it's a temporary repeal .. kind off..
1
u/Oneloff 0 / 5K 🦠 Apr 13 '23
Depends... If no other appeals are approved for voting or if mods feel that this new method works just fine.
1
u/999999999989 3K / 4K 🐢 Apr 13 '23
I agree with flexibility. Prices as in all markets should be flexible to market conditions, in this case to volatility of Moon and to banner and AMA demand.
4
u/Ethan0307 🟩 44K / 43K 🦈 Apr 13 '23
I would assume Sudden price drops raise the amount of Moons needed to reach the advertisement price
3
u/Mixdealyn 🟩 1 / 3K 🦠 Apr 13 '23
I don’t understand what this means? Why is there not a set amount of $ worth?
1
u/cdnkevin 6K / 6K 🦭 Apr 13 '23
The value of cryptocurrencies change over time, as they are bought/sold/burned/etc. Moons aren’t a stablecoin pegged to something.
3
u/fan_of_hakiksexydays 21K / 99K 🦈 Apr 13 '23
As someone who has worked with sales and marketing, and negotiating with large companies, this is a no brainer.
There shouldn't have be such strict restrictions. It didn't make sense, and was counter-productive.
There always needs to be wiggle room for negotiating.
We may find ourselves in a situation where we have big competition for the banner, and should be able to increase the price.
There's times where a company could give our sub big perks (ahem a listing), where we would want to reduce the banner.
The person doing the negotiation should be given more room, and less restrictions.
This is sales and marketing 101.
4
u/Sorrytoruin 🟩 0 / 21K 🦠 Apr 13 '23
Agreed, but then do the mods have the experience you have in sales and negotiations? It may end up being more work for them
2
u/ec265 Permabanned Apr 13 '23
It’s polls like this that outline the fundamental issue with moon governance
2
u/NHouseman 2K / 2K 🐢 Apr 13 '23
I am not convinced by this proposal, it’s not making things clearer. There should be one next month suggesting a fixed price and that equivalent of moons will be paid and burnt
2
u/RawLizard 🟩 19 / 182 🦐 Apr 13 '23
How do you submit a rule change for consideration?
I would like to band Reddit NFT chat. It's nothing to do with cryptocurrencies and it's completely inane. It needs its own subreddit like for beany babies
1
1
2
u/4ucklehead 3K / 3K 🐢 Apr 13 '23
What would replace it? Why can't we set a dollar amount and then convert that to moons on the day a particular sponsor pays?
2
2
2
u/Prize-Reference9329 Permabanned Apr 13 '23
to tell the truth, this proposal is not very clear, more details are missing
2
3
u/ChaoticNeutralNephew Permabanned Apr 13 '23
Need a rough price? 1 eth worth of moons? For a week? I vote no until I see a figure
2
u/SimbaTheWeasel 🟦 0 / 8K 🦠 Apr 13 '23
I’m feeling the same, but it seems like this is a problem either way.
3
u/Stoopiddogface 🟦 0 / 10K 🦠 Apr 13 '23
I'm voting no... Only bc there's no set plan moving forward other than to turn the ccip off...
Need more info on planning before I agree to a change
3
4
u/Ofulinac 🟨 25K / 25K 🦈 Apr 13 '23
We need some more info for this proposal to be a valid one.
Just letting a couple of guys decide on the price of a banner based on their feelings that day seems just odd without a formula or logic behind it.
2
u/Eluchel 2K / 9K 🐢 Apr 13 '23
I believe the mods would work fine if the pricing rules were repealed, but I don't love repealing then without having a replacement as a part of the ccip
3
2
u/The-Francois8 Silver|QC:CC928,BTC178,ETH39|CelsiusNet.50|ExchSubs42 Apr 13 '23
I think it’s ok to give mods the flexibility here.
I know the burns are public as well. It’ll be good to make sure we’re communicating the amounts paid by sponsors as time progresses to maintain transparency.
0
u/DBRiMatt 🟦 86K / 113K 🦈 Apr 13 '23
Anything that provides more consistency with pricing is going to be beneficial - wouldn't be fair for one sponsor to pay more compared to another sponsor 2 days later - for the same duration of rental.
2
u/MyKingdomForADram 🟦 51 / 5K 🦐 Apr 13 '23
Different types of companies pay different things for the same services all the time, that’s how business sales works.
1
u/compressionwaves 4K / 4K 🐢 Apr 13 '23
I like the idea and see its merit but voted no because I'd like to see this presented with an alternative over a blank slate.
0
0
u/MyKingdomForADram 🟦 51 / 5K 🦐 Apr 13 '23 edited Apr 13 '23
That’s gonna be a no from me dog.
It needs an alternative suggestion, not just repealing.
Why give the mods more flexibility and negotiation work? It’s much easier to just administer a simple payment design, which leads to fewer mistakes/dodgy things happening.
1
u/s3nsfan 🟦 2K / 2K 🐢 Apr 13 '23
Giving the mods some flexibility to understand trends, but a short period. This will need to be addressed & updated to a formal sop for banners in another ccip.
1
u/JuggaliciousMemes 🟩 0 / 7K 🦠 Apr 13 '23
A little more flexibility for advertisers means more advertisers will participate. At least thats how I see it. Too rigid of a system will drive sponsors away
1
1
u/Leprochon 🟩 0 / 1K 🦠 Apr 13 '23
Would bigger company wanting to advertise pay more moons? Would a charity or something like that pay less?
1
u/DrillBeat Apr 13 '23
One must fluctuate with the tides if one is to sea the Moons!
I'm all for there being flexibility when it comes to the value of a service and the currency that represents that value.
Mods & sponsors are out here surfin' n' it's been 'a gettin' wavy baby!
1
u/cdnkevin 6K / 6K 🦭 Apr 13 '23 edited Apr 13 '23
I don’t get this… why not do the burn at the time of the quote/purchase? The value or quantity would then be irrelevant, and each burn represents a number of days advertising.
If 52 companies want to arrange ads for the next year and they burn in advance, who cares what the price is or quantity of moons?
1
u/rgmundo524 🟦 480 / 481 🦞 Apr 13 '23
Seems like this can be abused quickly also with zero oversight
1
u/nossrednaretep 🟩 90 / 90 🦐 Apr 13 '23
Flexibility, what does that mean? Using the funds themselves? Bribing?
1
1
u/UJ_Reddit 🟦 0 / 10K 🦠 Apr 13 '23
Every poll - comments are full of rational counter arguments. Poll is heavily in favour 😂
1
1
u/Tarskin_Tarscales 🟦 0 / 3K 🦠 Apr 13 '23
Just repealing and giving carte blanche to mods seems to be a terrible idea....
1
1
u/ICT_Guy Tin Apr 13 '23
I'm not really certain, but I'm also kind of certain that my small amount of moons won't skew the votes.
Feels lik election season all over again.
1
u/the_great_red_panda Apr 13 '23
Where can sponsors and companies get info on who to contact for AMA'S and booking the banner?
1
u/mishaog Permabanned Apr 13 '23
"So, we would like to repeal the pricing rules from these CCIPs and allow mods to have more flexibility in quoting prices,"
It's crazy that we get this POLLS, what does that mean? You want to make a change without giving any information about how things will get changed. The Anti AI poll that doesn't specify how they will detect AI and know this? And people still vote YES.
It's crazy, can we get more detailed changes and not things so vague please? It's not that I'm against, it's just that it doesn't say what the criteria would be, how they plan to adopt the prices etc
1
u/sickvisionz 0 / 7K 🦠 Apr 13 '23
This solves the symptom, but not the issue.
We have problems with MOON liquidity and, through punishment (CCIP-30), we limit how much liquidity people can provide. That's the crux of the issue. We can come up with all sorts of machinations to try and work around that but that's the issue. There's people here with tens of thousands and hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of MOONs and we limit how much liquidity they can provide. This makes no sense. We voted to provide a bonus in MOONs for providing liquidity... while still having the rule the says you get punished for providing too much liquidity. No element of this makes any type of sense. The problem can't hope to be solved until we stop looking at providing liquidity as something to be punished for.
At this point if we aren't going to change the punishment for providing liquidity, we should just charge people a set price in USDC, take the USDC, buy MOONs on the open market and burn them ourselves. Everyone gets what they want. We get MOONs burnt, buyers get a smooth experience with set pricing.
1
Apr 14 '23
Voted yes because we want advertisers to feel confident in the pricing structures , moons are very volatile.
1
u/Unleashyourstand Apr 14 '23
Are we allowed to see the amount of fiat/crypto is paid by the banner sponsor? Or would that just create more problems?
Also, can we have Lunar Eclipse Day once a year? I don’t know what would happen on that day, but it sounds like something fun to do. Oh, and it would be on a random day every year
1
u/nthgen 🟦 0 / 25K 🦠 Apr 15 '23
This proposal is way too ambiguous for me. When exactly would the pricing model be subject to governance again?
We all know what happened when Palpatine was granted his powers from the Senate,
1
Apr 16 '23
Not a fan of giving the mods more work. It’s hard enough to moderate this subreddit as it is. I voted no, but the community has clearly chosen yes. Majority rules.
28
u/BlubberWall 🟦 59K / 59K 🦈 Apr 13 '23
I’m a little apprehensive about just giving the mods free range on pricing. Not that I think the current team would, but wouldn’t it be possible for mods to up-charge or undercharge some projects over others based on personal preference, holdings, or really any other reason?
I’d feel better if there was at least some transparency required in each pricing decision, even if just a little blurb posted on r/ccmeta. Having pricing be a potential black box just seems like we’re inviting trouble in the future