$ZAIBATSU BURNED: 31,580,000,000 🔥
TOTAL $GME DISTRIBUTED: 9,020.8 🤠
502/1000 WAGIES CLOCKED IN 😎
Do the math and clock in early🙂
https://t.co/mXZhscqTTh
ca: 0x5DBaCA8327B0bAA57eB6C872a333Bf8D6F642BA3
I just pulled a $68 CGC 10 Pokémon card on Solana 👀
The result: an uncommon 1999 1st Edition Golduck worth 1.4x the pack price.
Everyone is tokenizing Pokémon cards.
One Arena wants to make them playable 🎰
It just relaunched on Solana as a TCG gacha + battle platform:
→ Rip packs containing real Pokémon, One Piece & sports cards
→ Earn 2% cashback in Silver on every rip
→ Climb the leaderboard and unlock prizes
→ Use your rewards to enter battles
The standout is Pack Royale:
Players open together and battle for the winning pull.
Still gacha, so know the odds and set a budget.
But turning pack openings into a multiplayer game is a genuinely fun twist.
After the interview with @0xDaes and @RickCrosschain yesterday, they asked about the future of @SazareProtocol and what development will look like as the project matures.
The answer was that we will continue building out foundational markets, which are, and will continue to be, the core of the protocol. But last night, I started thinking about what else could be built on top of that foundation and came up with a small idea.
A future of “add-ons,” where the core is an SZR-style launched token and creators can combine additional features on top of it.
The idea that immediately came to mind, in a world of infinite possibilities, was an NFT collection that receives the creator rewards. It would work as follows:
Launch an SZR-style token with all the features of the volatility warehouse, floor, and issuance curve.
Direct all creator rewards to an NFT staking contract.
Users can burn the token to mint NFTs and receive a share of the creator rewards. The system could also allow rerolls, giving users another chance to receive an NFT with a higher rarity.
If you do not like the NFT you receive, instead of keeping it, you could reroll and receive a 90% refund, or some other arbitrary amount, while the remaining 10% is burned.
Rarity traits determine the share of creator rewards each NFT receives from trading. Higher rarity means a larger share of the fees.
As more NFTs are minted, the circulating token supply decreases and the floor rises, creating greater scarcity for the token itself.
Additional utility could then be built around the token, gaming, merchandise, speculation, or anything else. This increases token trading, which increases the fees earned by the NFTs. The NFTs then become more valuable, creating an interesting dynamic in which value flows back and forth between the token and the NFT collection.
The issuance curve inherently limits the growth of the NFT supply. Burns from minting and rerolling NFTs, along with the natural cycles created by floor sells and volatility warehouse profits, would limit the total quantity even further.
This is only one example of something that could be created: a gacha-style NFT collection that allows holders to earn RWAs, another token, or some other form of rewards.
I really think the possibilities are endless. Multiple add-ons could be created that are synergistic and work together, building a more diverse and interesting protocol from the very beginning. The only real limitation is how creative people can be with it.
I went ahead and prototyped this last night because it is a relatively simple idea. I am not saying this is 100% the direction the protocol will take, but I do think it is an interesting concept that should be discussed with the community and other builders.
I would love to hear some feedback on it.
Also: factory very soon. All of this was built while the long-running factory tests were underway, which remains the top priority.
It would be cool if a protocol was its own market maker.
Slowly bought tokens and held tokens on the way down, where there is a pre known price that also is always rising, and then sold them slowly on the way up and used those profits to burn tokens and continue this process.
@emmusyaa This fix will make it so that is not necessary. The pool will automatically optimize routing between the pool and the hook within a few basis points of best possible so that it doesn't even need to be a thought again.
I am aware of the fact that the new hook is not getting picked up by bots and indexers. This is due to the fact that the Hook holds all of the liquidity itself and it is not in the pool. So trades do not give the standard events that these tools rely on.
A wrapper is being created to have a pool that can hold liquidity and optimize swaps between that pool and the hook.
This will give users access to the hook liquidity and the liquidity pool in the same trade and should fix the issue of not being picked by indexers and trading bots.