by 0x56469159d91eb810dce34dd13ec4ed8194bca7be (Vroomway)
This poll is to try and introduce a new Wearable rarity tier that allows for greater flexibility and exclusivity within the market. Having to decide between 100 mint and 10 mint is often a really difficult decision. Not only for Wearable Creators but also for projects onboarding with Wearables. This last year I have made over 200 wearables and the majority of those were with 3rd party entities looking to onboard onto the platform. It’s always been a pain point trying to weigh the benefits of 100 vs 10.
Realistically, we should have a few more new options aside from 50, but I didn’t want to overload the initial proposal. I believe this tier will benefit the community both in the bear market we currently reside in and also in a bull market. This allows for better sell-out chances as well for smaller micro-communities that don’t want to bottleneck into 10 units.
I am open to feedback on the color for the tier. I chose red as its one of the colors we don’t have yet and to me, red is obviously my favorite color, but it is also a quality color that is striking to have on an exclusive item. Think about Red Bottoms
This is a super interesting topic! Recently, I experienced this exact quandary with my own WIP phygital project because I want the physical goods qty to align with the digital goods. I chose to move forward with 10 (vs. 100) due to the scarcity and rarity aspect, along with not having a MOQ to deal with at my factory (most people would). Of course, my situation dose not apply to those creating digital-only collections, but I wanted to share my POV for other situations!
With that said, I don’t find a major difference between 50 units vs. 100 units - but I do see a huge gap between 100 to 1000 (why not 250 or 500? hehe) and the other larger tiers (I’d love to know what 100K Common Items has been 100% distributed and to how many wallets). Your point about selling out is definitely a valid consideration and something that also weighed into my decision.
@ DC - would it be possible to understand how the current wearables mix, segmented by tier + type? I’m curious
Hey @deidre great point! Thank you for sharing your experience. Like I mentioned, I too believe that we should see many more tiers introduced, but I didn’t want to overload the explore team for integration. I think this a great case study to see how the community responds to the new tier and maybe we eventually introduce a way to choose our mint # instead of picking a specific quantity. Definitely room to improve!
I too would be interested in knowing the stats. I know that DOCTORdripp sent 95k of his Hater Blockers to 95k wallets. That is the only wearable (that I know of) that is a common and has come that close to “selling out”. Worth noting that those were given for free, not minted/purchased.
Yea sorry I opened a can of worms! Didn’t meant too lol…“thinking out loud” PS ~ the Hater Blcokers are one of my faves and honestly had no idea where I got them, so thank you for the 411 (+ thank you DOCTORdripp!).
LOL theres a funny story behind that actually, he was playin around with some stuff and either accidentally sent or kinda was jus figuring out the systems and sent them out, Opensea saw them as a “scam NFT” and now theyre only listed on DCL lolol fun lil story for ya
Totally agree! I find myself often trying to pick between 100 vs 10 but I almost always tend to lean towards 100 because I like to reach more people but I find myself often wanting a just a bit more of something in-between.
I’d like to share a perspective on what the difference between 100 to 50 means to me.
I have published around 33 legendary wearables. Out of those only 4 has sold out (2 of which had their remaining stock burnt so technically only 2 have sold out). Now for a moment, forget that higher rarity has a slight influence on sales; if these legendary mints were all published at “exotic” mint, 8 would be completely sold out with 14 being close to being sold out (meaning only 1-15 left to sell).
To me that’s quite a big difference in potential sell-outs and overall sell-outs too which is why I do think 100-50 is quite a big difference in that aspect.
Love this topic and would one day love to see a 25 mint rarity on top of this 50! (Cough hint hint cough.)
This is an excellent idea! I know that burning makes it possible to knock down the total amount of items as @Doki has discussed. However she also gets at the psychological impact of scarcity. I could state that there will only be 500 even though the rarity states 1,000. I would either need to burn the first 500 to accurately indicate the number remaining out of 1k or ppl would need to trust me that I’m going to burn the last 500. The first option eliminates the possibility of getting the low number mints. The second doesn’t create the same sense of scarcity since the last 500 wont be burnt until the first 500 are sold.
Perhaps it’s my decade+ of working in consumer products industry and having a consumer POV in this regard (vs. as a creator) – but burning seems so wasteful in terms of energy consumption and time. For me, that’s akin to “jobbing” or destroying goods (merchandising manipulation? LOL) I’m not really in favor of burning to achieve a lower QTY / retroactively adjusting, but that’s just me. I personally enjoy seeing the purchasing/trading journey for digital goods (i.e. date when it was minted/created, perhaps the item got off too a slow selling start, maybe it jumped in sales 6 months later – why why’s behind it, how long it’s been around, etc). Sell out time for an item, nor mint #, isn’t something I consider when buying – if I like it, I acquire it.
The beauty of digital goods, wearables especially, is there is a provenance established and the item can be sold forever and ever as long as the blockchain exists ~ that’s something special and unique that physical goods do not offer. In summary, no right or wrong for this proposal IMO and all for it if folks want a 50 “Exotic” Option!
So I hate burning too @deidre because it is extremely wasteful, however, its been necessary for me in the past. It is very misleading when someone sees say an Epic (1,000) and the data says “sold out” thought. This can give the wrong impression to both buyers and other creators. @AwedJob
I also love your perspective Deidre. It’s important with big changes like this in the wearable economy that we get input from both creators and consumers. Love the discussions
Thanks @HPrivakos and @OldGuy for the feedback. To us having the ability to choose any tier number would result in every other tier being pointless. There wouldn’t be an incentive for anyone to pick any other tier moving forward. Feels like a much bigger issue than this specific proposal aims to solve.