Signal Proposal: Additional Bazaar Fees towards Rarity Farming

Background: With the announcement of SZN1 Rewards now official, we explore how to align the community’s interests and rewards structures, as it pertains to Bazaar fees.
Currently, 2% is allocated to Pixelcraft and 1% to DAO treasury. While not exclusive of providing for RF rewards, the treasury funds are currently in no obligation to be allocated in any form of ratio towards the RF pool each season.

To tweak the numbers to 2% Pixelcraft, 0.8% DAO Treasury, and 0.4% RF rewards pool. 3.2% total fee from current standing 3% fee

Although nobody likes an increase in fees, the resulting increase from 3 to 3.2% would not be too disruptive on a per transaction basis, while for reference it would have increased SZN 1 rewards by a very healthy 36,800 GHST (As per figures shared by Coderdan). Competitors already charge higher fees as in 5% at NBA Top-Shot and 4.25% at Axie marketplace.

A major benefit is expanding the value proposition of gotchis and wearables, as proxies of participation into the wonderful and efficient trading mechanism that is the Aavegotchi bazaar on Polygon network.
As transaction volume increases, so do the RF rewards pool and the incentives for participants to keep the race interesting and motivating.

Increase Bazaar fees for RF pool?
  • Yes- Increase Fees
  • No- Keep fees as they currently are

0 voters


Thanks for making this proposal! I would support this change. I would also support keeping the DAO at 1% and changing the total fees to 3.5% (0.5% for RF rewards).

As you mentioned, Axie fees are 4.25% and Topshot is 5%, so our current fee schedule still comes in on the low side.


This is a well thought out proposal with some important stats to give better context. What I like most is that a fee top of 3.2% (or even 3.5% as Dan just mentioned) still keeps the Baazaar very competitive relative to other NFT marketplaces.

In general, it rings true that Rarity Farming rewards should be bolstered by Aavegotchi NFT trading.


As a new user, please bear with my lack of understanding as this space can be intimidating.

With the increase in fees, I think it’s hard to translate the benefits. If the value is broken down in detail, it would help a user like me to understand and relate to the changes. If, at the moment I think the trading mechanism is quite efficient, how will it be improved?

I suppose if I were to understand how wearables are connected to the %fees and Pixelcraft. I could make a better decision. ie: Lil Pumps collection. Having some sort of transparency on how this specific artist was chosen is pertinent to me. And maybe there is currently? I’m left to question the long-term value, not to say it’s bad collaboration. Having it justified by the community seems fair.

Having the knowledge of the criteria and efforts it takes the team to develop the assets/efficiency/incentives/governance etc would help with voting for any kind of fee increase.

BTW, I don’t think Topshot is anywhere near the same level of tech as Avegotchi. Night and day can’t describe the two ethier. Their business model is highly questionable.

Thanks in advance for any helpful info.


This makes a lot of sense. The biggest difference between the fees here and most NFT marketplaces, is that the community gets a large portion of the fees back in the form of growth and/or reward pools.
The amount could also be flexible based upon this, I’m sure plenty of newcomers would even see it as a positive when joining Aavegotchi in the future. It’s always nice to see your money talk for a change. That is what draws a lot of people to the space.

I’d be in favor of 3.5%+.

Sidenote: A feature upon either checkout or posting to the Baazar that allows us to pay a higher percentage to the DAO/Pixelcraft/RF Pools would be kind of cool.
Maybe anyone who donates could receive a reward in the form of XP or Kinship points with a set maximum per year or something.

Or for even a lesser option anyone who donates could receive unique Badges that stick with their Aavegotchi. As special leaderboards and minigames arise that could be a unique bracket of people to group together.


Sure! Rarity Farming is a unique feature of this project where revenues from sales such as Haunts are redistributed to the “rarest” gotchies. This first season will be a success regarding numbers because of the first haunt sales, but in the future, as new haunts are needed less and less, so will the rewards for rarity farming decrease as things currently stand.
With the fee increase, which the proposal aims to make of only .2 or .5% additional from current levels, we suddenly make Rarity Farming sustainable and profitable for the community well into the future.

Here you can see details re. SZN1 rewards:

The numbers in the spreadsheet would have been increased by somewhere around 36-45k GHST under the current proposal.

The ultimate objective is also to allow market participants to assign a much longer outlook when estimating a value for their gotchies and wearables. i.e. a gotchie that’s entitled to participate in RF rewards into eternity is much more valuable than a gotchie that participates in RF rewards only insofar as there are new dilutive haunts and sales going on.


Yep I like it. 0.5% is negligible but can stack up to greater rewards!


Thanks for the response. This is good info, preparing and anticipation is a good outlook. I’m still wrapping my head around the many facets. Reactive measures are given, but a preventative outlook is most definitely strategic.

I think the Haunts should still have a significant role because it serves as a vessel for exclusivity and scarcity. Low frequency might even drive higher participation. Maybe a topic on its own.

A side suggestion on voting. It would be good to have additional undecided and indifferent voting boxes to gauge the general knowledge of the community. Possibly encourage discussion, while keeping blind voting to a minimum.


Suuuper pumped at the overwhelmingly positive response. Thank you all!
Welcoming additional feedback or ideas to gather up before drafting a signal proposal.
Any voices now against raising fees would be actually very welcome. This is the time!

Looking for feedback now as to whether to split up the options between yes/no, or add third option differential between .2% and.5%. I know this specificity tradeoff has been frequently discussed as weighing against the “yes” vote.


Yes I would definitely try sticking to 2 options. But we can do a quick poll here to see what people are leaning towards:

How much fees should be allocated to Rarity Farming?
  • 0.5%, don’t reduce Treasury funds (+0.5% / 3.5% total)
  • 0.4%, reduce Treasury funds (+0.2% / 3.2% total)
  • Something else

0 voters


Sounds Gucci to me. +1


Very cool! Anything we can do to create a virtuous cycle of economic growth via sustainable rewards will do wonders for this game! I fully support this.


Live on snapshot Snapshot


With over 50% of season 1 rewards going to top the 100 Gotchis, it is not clear to me that this increase in fees would “expand the value proposition of gotchis and wearables.” I believe that it will actually decrease the value of any Gotchi’s not viewed as top 100 and lower the value of any wearables with rarity lower than Mythical. I would like to see a proposal that helps spread value across a larger set of gotchi’s.

Separately, is the plan to have a new haunt for each season of rarity farming? Or are marketplace transactions the primary source of funds for Season 2 rewards pool?

Since they have spread out RF rewards to 5k gotchis, the great majority of gotchis are now RF winners. So much that probably only the most egregious cases of inactive/abandoned gotchis are left out of the rewards.

Can’t say for certain, but most likely path is an H2 funding the majority of SZN2 rewards and perhaps if this agip6 passes then the rewards will be supplemented (not mostly composed of) baazaar fees.


Thank you for your message. Please see my reply/ previous post.

I think the 50 bps increase is reasonable, just not sure that it helps gotchis outside the top rankings much.

1 Like