Additional Distribution Opportunity

Community Treasury
1

As the Community Treasury Fundraise wraps up, the Rally Community was able to raise a significant amount for the treasury without tapping into the full 500M $RLY originally approved for distribution through the fundraise. In light of the large pool of ~300M remaining $RLY that was originally approved for distribution, I wanted to initiate a discussion about a different allocation of a portion of this pool - this allocation would be for distribution via Coinlist.

Coinlist provides a platform for digital asset companies to distribute their tokens to non-US parties who are interested in becoming a part of new token protocols and ecosystems. Coinlist prides themselves on compliant distributions, focusing on crypto-savvy audiences outside of the US, and carefully vetting all parties through Know Your Customer (KYC) and Anti-Money Laundering (AML) compliance processes.

Based on the mission of the Rally Network and the creator economies that it supports, Coinlist has expressed its interest in assisting the Rally Network with international distribution and awareness building directed at crypto audiences. The Coinlist site will publish a deep dive content page for $RLY to enable their audience to learn more about the Rally Network, $RLY and the creator coin ecosystem - here are some examples of what they have published for other projects: FLOW, SKALE and OCEAN. This distribution channel could be another step for the Rally Network to continue its growth and to attract the right community members to take part in our protocol.

Why Coinlist and what does success look like? The FLOW distribution event saw ~13,500 participants become part of the FLOW ecosystem. Currently, $RLY has 1,160 holders. Success would be to partner with Coinlist to increase $RLY token holder participation by an order of magnitude.

Would like to hear the community’s opinion on partnering with Coinlist. The distribution would likely be limited to 25-40M of the $RLY previously approved for distribution through the Community Treasury Fundraise; open to thoughts on that as well. In addition, each Coinlist participant would be capped on participation.

Leveraging Coinlist as a new distribution channel for crypto-savvy users could be worth exploring - looking forward to having a discussion.

5 Likes
2

Great to see that that was possible without needing the full designated amount!

Aside from the current creators that do their own PR / fan engaging and with that, attracting their fans to the CC’s (and thus to the crypto world) like the recent PTM news on backstage possibilities).

I think that in addition to that, going for Coinlist as a distribution option, could be a perfect move in order to gain more / broader awareness within the crypto community. Which, if successful, also helps bring in more attention & growth leverage for the Creators & their coins in the end.

I cannot judge if the mentioned volume to make available would make sense or not. I know Flow has been really successfull, but it would be interesting to hear from Coinlist what their average listing does. In the sense of amount of participants x average token (or €/£/¥) amount per participant.

Plus of course it would depend on the “conditions” set, in order not to hurt (€) current RLY holders and creators & their coin values.

Based upon the set outlines, I do see it as a positive outcome to raise more awareness for the Rally community.

3

Hi Ira,

I think this could be working, depending on what your goal is.

If your main goal is more involvement in Rally I think there are better ways. If your main goal is raising money (with sub-goal more involvement in Rally), I think this could work if we are very careful.

The big difference with Flow for example was the fact they didn’t have any circulating supply yet when they launched on Coinlist.

I think you don’t want to flush the open market directly with extra supply of RLY, that will have negative price pressure RLY --> negative price pressure on Creator coins --> unhappy creators, fans and investors --> less involvement --> negative price pressure on RLY. A negative spiral.

So I think the length of the lock up period is crucial for the success. Flow for example had a lock up period of 24 months, with half being released after 12 months. If we would for example do the same, this could be really positive.
That way we are not flushing the market with RLY --> no negative price pressure on RLY --> more people get involved in the project due to Coinlist exposure --> positive price pressure RLY --> positive price pressure Creator Coins -->happy creators and fans -->more involvement. A positive spiral. When extra supply hits the market in 12/24 months Rally is much bigger and can handle that extra supply easy.

So my summary; A Lock up period (min 12 months) is crucial.

2 Likes
4

In your last post about community fundraising you mentioned the Agency was still raising and busy selling more of the remaining rally. Does this post mean they stopped? So total number of Rally sold by agency will be around 200mm?

5

While I agree with Martin’s points, I think a greater distribution of RLY will be useful for the long term success of the project, even if it means the potential for some added sell pressure in the short term.

Coinlist has an extensive list of crypto investors, so we would get more people invested in RLY’s success this way. This will also be helpful in generating more buzz and momentum in attracting new creators and communities.

1 Like
6

Joonian, that’s what I meant with asking what the main goal is for doing this:

  1. Main Goal. Extra money in treasure. Sub Goal: Get more people involved with Rally/ More token holders
  2. Main goal. Get more people involved with Rally/more token holders.

When number 1 is your main goal I think this could work as long as you have a decent lock up period.
When your main goal is getting more people involved with Rally and get more token holders I think there are smarter ways.

Flow is the most successful business case of Coinlist. They had 13.500 participants. Keep in mind Flow is one of the most hyped coins in the ecosystem and when they launched there was no circulating supply and Coinlist was the only way to get involved with the project. So there was already a lot of “pend up demand” for the Flow token. To show the “hype” of Flow, their Coinlist community sale was at 10 cent, price now USD 22.97. That is 229 X. I don’t think it is realistic to say Rally will have the same number of participants/wallet holders added, as our coin is already available and less “hyped”.

When you want to get more people involved in the Rally network and get more Token holders, I think the best way to structurally get more people involved is giving more people access to the $Rally. I think key to having a successful product is a combination of having a great product (will people buy it?) and distribution (can people buy it?, is it easily available to them?).

Now we are only listed on decentralized exchanges, which is awesome for the techy part of the crypto world, but not good for main adoption. I think listing at one of the major exchanges will be the next big thing for the Rally community. To get more people involved (first step to mass adoption) and to create a flywheel effect.
A comparison between the number of Rally token holders vs projects with same magnitude of marketcap on Binance and Coinbase.

Rally 1,254 Token holders 23 MM Market Cap
Binance
WPR 50,539 Token holders 19MM Market Cap
GVT 6,969 Token holders 22MM MC
Dock 30,322 Token holders 24MM MC
MITX 111,718 Token holders 26MM MC

Lowest Market caps on Coinbase

NMR 31,735 Token holders 208MM MC
DNT 34,843 Token holders 226MM MC

These figures show that the expected impact on community involvement and number of token holders is massive when listing on a major exchange. Expected impact on number of token holders also much bigger as the Coinlist project.

So for me if the main goal is raising money for treasure, Coinlist could be the way to. (with decent lock up)

To make a really big impact on Rally community involvement/number of token holders and create a flywheel effect, the next big thing could be a launch on a major exchange.

7

A more extensive explanation that is, but fully in line with my thoughts on the Coinlist / Flow example. As that is probably their best-case example, but with a different starting point back then for Flow (no availablity, hyped massively) compared to current Rally situation (already available, less hyped).

I could not directly find coinlist examples (at least from a token release perspective) comparable with current Rally situation, so hard to compare and don’t think the Flow use-case is representative for Rally.

Interesting insight on the marketcaps < > amount of token holders. Looking at it from that perspective, if your mentioned “option 2” is the goal of the Rally “board”, a move towards getting maximum impact on people involved in Rally (as RLY token holders or CC supporters) would be such a move to for instance Binance / Coinbase / etc. Fully agree that that is way more accessible to the majority of the crypto involved folks compared to current availability.

Curious on @ira’s thoughts and more specific backgrounds on the suggestion.

8

Hey @martinmartin, thanks for your thoughtful comments as always.

You are correct that there are several goals that are targeted with this distribution. The Coinlist partnership has the potential to expand the reach and distribution of $RLY in a measured way. Building the treasury up with additional, targeted purchasers has the benefit of raising funds, and Coinlist also addresses the community goal of achieving a measured distribution through access to an international, curated, crypto-savvy audience that values the education and narrative of projects presented by Coinlist.

Agree, lock up terms can be beneficial to protecting the stability of the market as well as attracting the right participants. Like the Community Fundraise, during which the Community Agent targeted participants interested in longer term commitments to the Rally Network, Coinlist is open to setting up the structure of sales based on 6-24 month lock-ups. This will be reflected in the final proposal.

Yes, we understand that the Community Fundraise is largely concluded and now in process of finalizing settlement. I’ll provide a final update via Discourse on total numbers sold once that information is received from the Community Agent.

2 Likes
9

Thanks for flagging your points, @Markovic.

Something that excited Coinlist about the Rally project is that much of what Rally is doing has not yet been done. As you note, the Rally platform is already launched, and $RLY is already an established cryptocurrency with active participants in the protocol. This IS different than other projects that they’ve worked with, and this novel engagement likewise drives Coinlist to a different level. With all eyes on compliance these days, they have conducted diligence on Rally governance in the protocol, $RLY as a token, and the way that the Rally community has raised the treasury funds - and want to get involved. It’s affirming that the Rally Network is attracting the attention of the industry players who care about what we care about: engagement, participation and compliant distribution of tokens that have real use cases and purpose.

Achieving extra reach with $RLY remains a goal, when achieved in a measured way. As a network, it’s always been a goal to achieve growth in a sustainable manner with the right participants. Recall the early distribution model was designed to get $RLY rewards into the hands of those willing to put the effort into benefiting the protocol with liquidity mining and yield delegation, and as well for early creator coin network adopters. In this way, the community has experienced its initial growth with parties interested in the health and long term goals of the Rally Network.

At some point, it may be the right time to list on a centralized exchange with the broader, mass-adoption reach that those exchanges support. As Rally continues its exciting trajectory in its still nascent stages, a measured approach towards growth remains a positive strategy.

1 Like
10

Thanks for the explanation Ira. You have my yes vote for the Coinlist proposal! If the community vote supports this proposal what would be approx the Coinlist timeline?

p.s.
After the Coinlist move, I personally wouldn’t wait to long to join a major exchange. The defi/blockchain market is smoking hot now, the more people we can get in, and turn into life long Rally fans the better. Momentum is now and nobody knows if and how fast that can change. Especially with the vaccination speeding up, and life returning to more normal. I can see a scenario where people in late spring early summer start to prefer travelling, dining out, real live events etc. above involving in defi projects :slight_smile:
When momentum disapears, launching on a major exchange could have a smaller impact on the Rally community growth. I am positive that when people get involved, and start understanding Rally better, they see the massive potential and the uniqueness of the project. Just my 2 cents…

1 Like
11

In terms of timing, would like to get the community to provide any additional feedback for another few days, and then we’ll put this up to a vote. If the community approves the proposal, Coinlist will tee up its processes on publicizing Rally as a project - would be a few weeks from then for the distribution to launch, likely mid-March.

And, your 2 cents are much appreciated, as always. You’re right that timing and momentum can be everything in crypto. Please keep providing your thoughts, on centralized exchanges and other matters - the numbers you’ve laid out above, and your perspective on the power of a listing as it relates to community involvement and growth, are worth a whole new discussion unto themselves.

12

Absolutely love the idea of getting $RLY into the hands of more people, but I feel weird about the exact implementation.

Would it be possible for us to do some math on the cost of doing this versus us using the tokens to do something like incentivize bigger artists and gaming talent (or to throw events or create shows) so that when people are buying/interacting with the $RLY coin they have more of a use-case than just prospecting for revenues?

I think lock-up period is extremely necessary if these tokens are being sold at a discount. Do we know what the price expectation is for this? We haven’t gone below .25c in weeks.

Thank you for bringing this discussion Ira I think this will be a good kick in our butts to do some due diligence around RPPU and how much money users actually get into the platform over a time period.

1 Like
13

Ira and team have been working with Delphi folks on this project closely as well as myself. The “cost” of doing this, which is coming from the community treasury allocation of tokens, doesn’t take away from any network rewards or creator allocation of tokens.

Separately, DFS and Mike are working hard on revamping our overall network rewards to ensure that creators and their communities are more fairly rewarded. There’s three phases of this that we’re actively working through and this is a rough draft:

Sales and Marketing Business Phase - Flow controls (done) and $RLY rewards rework such that creators and fans don’t have to sell the creator coin to realize rewards. We’ll then put a community proposal forward to significantly increase Community Activity Rewards.

Timeline - Mid-March

TBC Phase - Introduce new Creator Coin templates, Creator Coin fair launch, rework existing TBCs such that both larger inflows of capital and less volatile prices can be realized to enable better usage of Creator Coins. Again, increase Community Activity Rewards

Timeline - Q2

Revenue and Staking Phase - Integrate NFTs (both existing external products and our own approach), introduce Creator Coin staking for long term fans and economic participants, and have our developer ecosystem running to build more and more use case tools and integrations, we’d like to propose a new type of Community Activity Reward that will be rewarding revenue transactions, staking, NFT transactions, and user activity within a Creator Coin economy. Again dial up rewards.

Timeline - probably late Q2 or Q3

As a reminder, we have 7.5B tokens allocated to Community Activity Rewards over the next 8+ years. This comes out to 2.5M tokens/day, of which we’re barely distributing 2% / day due to the current known design limitations.

14

Didn’t mean to imply we would be taking away from the network rewards or creator allocations, I’m asking whether these users are the right folks to have on the platform at this stage.

We are in a very special period of time where we’re insulated from a lot of the market right now and have some pretty incredible stability and adoption through actual platform usage.

We’re acquiring $5-10M (CL price listing insight would be nice) for the treasury and ~10k crypto/gains-focused holders with no direct connection to any creators. This initiative will undoubtedly add an order of magnitude of coin inquiry, applications, and system stress.

What makes this trade worth it in your eyes and heart? Do we need the money now? If we don’t, won’t these tokens be worth more in a later sale anyway? We’re on pace to onboard 2x the creators we onboarded in Jan, and are likely to be close to doubling that again in March. In addition, our hitrate of creators with actual lean-in is increasing as use case playbooks get proven.

Once we go on Coinlist there’s no stopping the eventual listing on a main exchange (and I assume many DEX doing the same via Uniswap or however).

My vote is to wait on this until end of Q2/early Q3 until the new CC templates, fair launch, entry/exit taxes, and TBC rework are implemented and can be tweaked to assist with survival rate against the horde.

1 Like
15

Rally is relatively unknown as a crypto project. We spread our limited resources across generating awareness and participation with 1) Creators, 2) mainstream fans and users, 3) developers and 4) the global crypto community.

For Rally to be very successful, all 4 audiences are necessary ingredients to the Rally community. At different stages of Rally’s growth, we sometimes are focused on one or two audiences more than others. At launch, we only focused on a small slice of crypto users that could navigate Yearn vaults and LP pools on DEX’s.

This partnership with Coinlist will be a major step forward in generating awareness and participation in the crypto community. And I don’t think it should be the last. Your note makes it sound like crypto users are antagonistic to the network. While some of that has happened in the past and it will happen again in the future, Rally needs to design our network in such a way that the crypto community is a large positive contributor and their actions are not parasitic to rewards and participation. I believe we have the smarts to figure that out and already have taken some major steps forward.

In my view, Rally has the opportunity to be 1,000x more successful than we are now. If one only hopes to be 2x more successful than where we are now, one would have a different view on timelines and order of operations.

This partnership with Coinlist will dramatically accelerate our efforts. I hope everyone considers this proposal positively.

1 Like
16

Please excuse my poor communication.

I understand that crypto users are not antagonistic/parasitic to the network and are an important community for Rally’s health+growth.

My post was meant to say that I believe the second phase of your shared dev timeline drastically improves the onboarding and management of 10,000+ profit-seeking users. Specifically, fair launch.

If that doesn’t fit the rest of the strategic timeline, no problem.

I do view this proposal as positive, and I am committed to Rally’s path to 1000x.

1 Like
17

Great Discussion here on this thread! Just wanted to add that since there is a broad agreement that we should move forward with Coinlist distribution, and that distribution would likely be some price that is an average of the market price. I suggest we halt the Market maker Uniswap sales of RLY, to have that average price more accurately reflect the market demand for RLY.

It seems that even a small change in that average price for such a large number of tokens to Coinlist would net the Rally treasury a greater amount than whatever the agent would bring to the treasury through further sales at this time, and doesn’t preclude the agent selling more in the future after we close the coinlist distribution. I’m not sure if that is how the price would be determined for such a sale, but if so (and setting aside possible concerns around adequate RLY liquidity on Uniswap), then the market maker in service of the best interests of the community and maximizing the treasury could halt sales even without a vote…and should in my opinion.

Additionally, digging back through the forums, I was unable to find what the total amount the market maker was going to sell into Uniswap as a portion of the 500M allocation. @ira could you please provide that number whenever the market maker provides their update if there was a hard number?

Perhaps more importantly, how does community feel about pausing the RLY treasury sales to Uniswap?

Thanks!

From the rational for the amended terms:
“This flexibility will enable the Community Agent to maximize proceeds to the community treasury when market conditions are heated. Simultaneously, the Community Agent will continue to act in the best interests of the Rally Community, and accordingly will be tasked to balance such sales of unrestricted tokens with the protection of market stability for $RLY.”

18

@ira, @mvellank Hi folks. Just flagging these questions.

Will the community agent require a vote to stop market sales the market price sales it’s been conducting? Does the contract close or certain aspects like Market sales vs. Coinlist need to be put to a vote.

I would contend that it may not be in the best interests of the community to overly constrain the price appreciation of $RLY. No comments required here.

Is there a set portion of the 500M allocated to these market sales?

We moved quickly to approve the Agent and they’ve done fantastic work to bolster the community treasury. How soon can we expect to re-evaluate their role, and further need for community treasury funds weighed against interest of our LPs in the community.

A note here that Rally compensates the Agent at 3.5% of all sales. Agent compensated in $RLY, 90 day vest. Our community Treasury stands at ~26MM and after Coinlist will be well above 30MM. Full amount not yet realized in Zapper…unclear when it will be transferred over.

I would like to explore the community’s interest in pausing the market sales together with approving the Coinlist sale in the absence of compelling arguments for specifically continuing the market sales.

Look forward to your thoughts on this. Others in the community as well as it pertains to these continued market sales.

Cheers,
Grand

19

Grand - the community agent does not intend to continue market operations indefinitely for sure. It’s quite understandable the concern the community has over the size of their token budget. However, there are two very big opportunities past CoinList that they are working on that I’m positive the community will be excited about. And the community has asked for many, many times so it won’t be a surprise what these projects are. We don’t know exactly what timelines are just yet, but it will be in the order of months not weeks (or years) for additional information. I suggest we enable these events to play out and the revisit this topic in full.

The flexibility the agent has given the last community proposal enables the whole community to benefit from the agents’ discretion.

As with many things at this stage of the network, we’re in this weird spot where we as a USA based project can’t talk about certain topics nearly as much as we’d like out of an abundance of caution in our counsel’s interpretation of regulations. But I can assure you that the working relationship with the agent has been fantastic and I hope they’ll be in a situation soon where we can share the specifics of these projects.

20

Thank you for the response on this. Questions answered!

If the flexibility of market sales is part of what enables the larger opportunities moving forward to happen - then great, all for it! This was at the core of what I was after, and that these ongoing sales were not meant as an ongoing means of replacing the YDVs for community treasury funding given the lack of an apparent reason for the agent to continue on without further amendments to the fundraising proposal. Fair enough to revisit at the conclusion. Have a great weekend!

Grand

1 Like