Proposal for Land Auction/Raffle #3 Within 1 week of Citaadel Release

The basic price dynamics of this is that if we go before launch, it will boost alch prices and ghst prices, and if we go after launch current landowners will have a chance to work their land and the effect on alch and ghst prices will be less. The longer we wait after launch, the less effect it will have, as there will be more internal growth that can be used for liquidity.

Going before launch, essentially traps the liquidity and forces more new capital inflows. There’s a good chance that going before launch, coupled with the altars and squares, could cause a liquidity shock and moon alchemica prices.

I’m not making a judgement on what is better for the economy, but that is what the effects of stacking these things would be, as the prelaunch supply of alchemica is limited in a manner that the post launch supply is not.

1 Like

Just a reminder that we currently have 30,000 parcels that have been auctioned or raffled.
As far as I know, we do not have 30,000 active players who intend to own land. We probably don’t have 15,000 active players who intend to own land.

I would like to see us monitor the player-base over the next few weeks before deciding on a date for the next auction/raffle. And I would really like to see us resist the temptation to simply hold the auction because the timing feels magical with the realm launch.

While I love the GBM events, I will not support a signal proposal for the release of additional land until we have player numbers that are more in line with the current existing supply. If guild partners are seeking to acquire more land, they can (and should) do so on the secondary market where tons of parcels are for sale at prices similar to final auction bids.


I hear you. It’s a fine line to find the balance which is why we need a good conversation among DAO stakeholders. I still have 130+ parcels that I would like to see appreciate. The problem with guilds/large entities acquiring via the secondary market, is that there is no batched land for them. Some guilds have 50-100 ETH to deploy but don’t want scattered remnants. Attention spans are short in web3 gaming and I want to capture that ETH vs see it allocated to another project.

Again, there has been a lot of feedback that an auction/raffle within a month after launch would be more appropriate as we all hope to scale significantly in DAU and investors by that point.


In addition to the excellent point Wagmi makes here, there is the fact that most land is not on the market, or it is priced at an unreasonable price. The Floor value of a spacious should be about 1028, like the voting power, and the floor is well above that, even with no current utility.

It is 100% expected to be like this, as it is illogical to buy land for 20-50% above the flor, when you know that there is a 3rd auction/raffle coming, and you can participate in GBM rewards, liquidate tickets for cash, enter tickets, and generally have a shot at getting some below floor at floor, or nearer floor.

The part where we upfront said there would be 3 auctions and raffles, is the very thing that makes the market not move. The market cannot truly heat up until it is all dispersed.

The people camping land in districts hoping that a guild will suddenly become desperate and pay them an extra $1000 for the land, will have to make a decision of whether they prefer to just get their liquidity back and sell at a fair price, so they can participate in the auction, or they can sit their with locked liquidity, while their potential customer goes and gets other land, flips it for fair price, and maybe eventually comes back with enough funds to meet their price.

Also, land is not a one land per person thing. It’s 1 per gotchi, as a base ratio, and one gotchi can easily service ten lands, if that is how one prefers to do it. A player wanting to power mine, would surely want as many plots as possible, with as few gotchis as possible. This is the most efficient use of funds, if you are trying to play this game with a large bag and minimal help from others. Now that we see how difficult it is to maximize rental yields, it becomes apparent that owning a bunch of spacious plats that are fully built out, would be much more reliable and involve less social engagement.


Considering what @HARDKOR is pointing out about 1 gotchi theoretically being able to work more than 1 parcel, might play into the hands of the lenders.

People without gotchis may be happy to buy land and rent gotchis to work it, making the rentals even more attractive.

I hadn’t thought of that until now.


If I am renting you a gotchi that has access to my spacious plot, that has level 5 harvesters on it, you are guaranteed double the income, and I don’t need to give you as big of a cut to be a desirable employer. I can shave off 1/3 of what I was giving the renter, and they will still be making far more than they were in the first place. For mew, that means I’m not going to tip anymore unless it’s a truly exceptional shift. The land is the tip. Actually, the land is a promotion to manager.

A person who owns tons of land, could offer to whitelist the gotchis of a person who has not enough land, for a subscription fee.

There are so many ways that land can be used to improve things for everyone, that it’s not a inflationary asset at all. You need to input money to buy the land, and that grows the ecosystem, and the land increases the value of the rentals to both ends of the deal, so it’s a large gain all around. Also… all those rewards for Rarity Season 4… all the people who want to jump in with a large DAO or guild and aren’t willing to get gouged on piecemeal leftovers in the bazaar…

As far as land appreciation goes… just survey it every round, and the alchemica stacks up. It appreciates every 90 days on its own. For a guy like Wagmi… if he has more land than Gotchis he could be charging a weekly subscription to a landless gotchi owner, to use it. Personally, I would charge whatever it costs to level that land up :wink:


Land Auction/Raffle #3 Proposal:

  • Hold the auction and raffle within the first two weeks of June (exact dates per Pixelcraft)

  • 8000 Parcels in total from predominantly districts 1, 6, 13, 23, 24, 25, 26. Parcels from previously auctioned/raffled districts may be included in the Auction per Pixelcraft discretion.

  • 70% (5600) of parcels in the auction, 30% (2400) in the raffle

  • Auction only to be held once 3M GHST from DAO is deposited in Aave OR amGHST for FRENS contract is deployed. This will maximize the available liquidity for the auction and best support floor prices.

Proposed Revenue Distribution:
-40% of revenue to the Rarity Farming Rewards Pool

-40% to Pixelcraft

-20% to the Aavegotchi DAO

-0% Burn edited after feedback to eliminate the burn

This proposal is synthesized from community feedback over the last week. The main concerns were NFT dilution, an auction/raffle feeling too rushed, inadequate available GHST liquidity, concern for the funding of Rarity Farming Season 4, and lack of clarity for which parcels were included. A June Auction will allow >2 weeks of full installation gameplay and will allow sufficient time for marketing and business development efforts to capture maximum investment. There is an adequate Gotchiverse Rewards Pool after the first two land auctions, and this sale will help fund RFS4 and perhaps even some of Season 5. This proposal has been discussed with the Pixelcraft team who support it and feel the target date is feasible.


Is the 5% burn a good use of real money? I’d rather put that into any of the other three categories, because we would get more bang for our buck.


good point the DAO could be staking 5% more on Aave for example


There should be no burn, but we should increase the size of raffle side, due to frens inflation, because we added FOUR months of delay to this, and that means more “investment” was already done for the frens side. The people who got their way on the delay side, caused inflation in doing so, in the hopes of “having better information”(the truth was more like - “I dont wanna lock my liquidity up till we are ready to launch”) and honestly… the info is the same as it has always been, so it was just frens inflation that was caused.

The DAO should be staking some inputs by default, even if it is just for getting gas money…

1 Like

I agree with this proposal and having no burn. I disagree with increasing the raffle side, 30% is a fair assessment.

Making a snapshot for this, before we fixed the broken voting on snapshot, is highly inappropriate and that proposal should be canceled.

Also, we never even had a poll in here… Making a freshly worded thing, and two people saying something, is not a consensus, it is a railroad.

Why is it not 9k parcels, or 10k parcels? It says 10k in the bible. What about different splits… none of this was discussed, publicly, just in private, between 4 insiders.


I think we need to resolve the voting situation before we make moves like this even if it’s a sig prop. I can’t imagine my renters having that big a chunk of my vote, doesn’t make sense to me. We’re not in a hurry why are we rushing to vote this in?


I think we could proceed with a Sig Prop even if the voting-power-issue is not resolved yet (if we really want/ must hasten things up… (for pressing economic reasons like prevention of depreciation of Alchemica)

but - as also mentioned somewhere in the Discord Dao-discussion – there should be definitely more options regarding the auction/raffle-split.

I think that it is reasonable to go forward with only 8000 parcels in the upcoming distribution #3.

I strongly endorse a auction/raffle-split of 50:50.

My guess is, that both of these measures would be favorable to the GBM-auction-action and overall parcel-prices.

I would allocate 50% of the revenue to the Rarity Farming Rewards Pool and decrease therefore the share to the Aavegotchi DAO to 10%. (since there is already enough GHST idle)


Why change from 10k to 8k parcels being auctioned/raffled? Where was this discussed? I’m guessing private conservations because i can’t see it in the DAO forum.

I agree with others that the voting power needs to be fixed before the snapshot proposal.


I consider this snapshot proposal to be illegitimate given that voting power has not been fixed since gotchi renting.

Heart this post if you agree.

This can raised again once voting power is fixed.


I appreciate that the intention of the land auction 3 Sigprop is to help keep things moving and try strike a balance between what has been discussed previously and what is achievable by devs but a fundamental flaw in our DAOs voting mechanism seems like something major to be rectified (to me at least) before we even hold any kind of Sigprop too.

To take an extreme example, under the current mechanism I could go start a quick forum thread with the proposal “Quadruple the playdrop alchemica quantities” which would likely gain a lot more support than it would if owners maintained full voting power. Sure it probably still wouldn’t pass but it’d still be a far more skewed result than what our most invested and to date most supportive members would vote for.

Again, not against the sigprop but just keen to hear some more info from PC themselves on feasibility of rectifying the voting mechanic before we get too close to a coreprop.

EDIT: Coderdan has indicated an approximately 14 day turn around on a fix in discord DAO discussion channel. With this in mind I personally wouldn’t be against a Sigprop progressing now as long as we clarify the following first:

  • Estimate of % borrowers make up in VP so it can be considered when assessing a close vote. I’d propose that this margin gets added to the differential required to win.
  • Poll on final quantity of parcels as this appears to be something that took most by surprise. Would be great if @stedari could raise this poll as I do believe he chose 8k in good faith but how the 8k was landed on was not entirely clear.
  • Repost of sigprop that contains these clarifications and the polled quantity

The approximate fix time for Snapshot is 14 days + Snapshot review time + whatever time it takes to implement after the review. This auction will be a $5M+ endeavor that needs significant lead-time from both technical and marketing perspectives. It’s my opinion that it’s in the best interest of all stakeholders to prepare adequately for the auction and a sig-prop is the first step.

The 8,000 Parcels is after a discussion with Pixelcraft about the feasibility and timing of an auction. This proposal would allow for a limited citaadel release with no bottom row or far right column districts. The 8 districts in the proposal would unite the map, form a complete rectangle, and offer a cohesive initial citaadel release (even if not the expected full map). The auctioned/raffled districts are in green and the white-out districts could be left out of the initial release to free up dev time.

It is misleading to the community to publish a poll that includes options which are not feasible. The proposal synthesized feedback from stakeholders and provided a specific, attainable parcel count.


Which of the 10 000 plots would have been selected if we didn’t choose to pivot to the 8k parcels?


Thanks for the clearer explanation on the how’s and whys. It is helpful when these are explained.

From what I’ve seen so far, the thing for a poll, would be the split between auction and raffle, as people have been quite varied in their thoughts on this, and it is very much a touchy subject, due to the reduction on the land quantity stacking with the tripling of the time between auctions. I’ve head arguments made for multiple options, that actually conflict in their reasoning, so it seems that more consensus is needed, is everyone is to feel that this has been a community process.

TL;DR - Date and Size seem locked, we just need a ratio poll now.

1 Like