Totally agree with you here–as an example–on the other side of the Blockchain world–Solana has a protocol called Mango (yup just like the fruit). They recently ran a wanna-be Unisocks NFT thingy–except it’s a baseball caps/hats with a Mango Logo–they got sales up as high as 3,500 DAI at one point:
I agree the idea in general has merit. But there needs to be a lot more thought in how to structure this.
I would feel far more comfortable if some in-the-weeds concerns were addressed first, since it’s not clear to me what this relationship is supposed to be except the DAO providing a desirable URL and also probably being the proposed CU’s largest customer (for convention swag). I’m worried about the appearance of self-dealing on a couple different fronts, and for no real control over branding since we can’t license MakerDAO’s logo and brand.
It just also generally seems like a lot of work to oversee for the minor financial potential compared to our actual core business of becoming the reserve currency of the blockchain.
- 00:00: Intro with Juan Guillén
- 00:45: MakerDAO Shop Core Unit with Coulter Mulligan and Mike Porcaro
- Hi, everyone. Welcome to the CULPS #06. Today we have the MakerDAO Shop, MDS-001. The two guys proposing this are Coulter Mulligan and Mike Porcaro, and they will be explaining what they are trying to achieve and hopefully answering all our questions.
- For more episodes of the series, follow this link
MakerDAO Shop Core Unit with Coulter Mulligan and Mike Porcaro (00:45)
12:07 — Andrew Burban: I like this idea of no funding requiered from the DAO, that it’s all self-funded. I do think you should vest a little bit — maybe a portion of the profits, 5%, 10% goes into vesting back to you
13:27 — Juan Guillén: Let’s say that Nadia’s team is organizing some kind of event in Colombia next year and they need one hundred t-shirts or something. Would that be the retail price or would they have access to a special price or we’ll see it on a case-by-case basis…?
18:04 — Juan Guillén: Guys, I hear that you’re speaking a lot about profit in the proposal. Let’s say a t-shirt costs US$10 to produce. What would be your suggested retail price? How much profit would we be looking at?
20:28 — Juan Guillén: I’ve usually be warned against going into partnerships where you share the profit and not the revenue, because it’s extremely easy to just make up costs. So potentially you could say “Yeah, we need to invest on this, we want to put a store on this, we want to pay ourselves salaries”, and then there’s no more profit to share. So even if you say that instead of 50% of the profit you’ll share 20% of the revenue, at least it’s a number that can be very easily measured and it’s harder to manipulate
23:23 — Planet_X: I have a question — or rather a comment about the website shop.makerdao.com. You want this website permanently. Some in the community might not be entirely comfortable with that. You could turn that thing into anything. If it has the MakerDAO.com name on it, I think a lot of people would want to own it. You could have the rights to the site for a number of years, but the name shop.makerdao.com belongs to MakerDAO
24:44 — Planet_X: I have a comment regarding the 50-50 profit sharing. Part of what you’re selling here is that the community doesn’t really have to get involved, but with a profit sharing someone at some point needs to go to your books and look into your numbers. Would it be possible to add a fixed fee…? Let’s say you sell a t-shirt for US$20, and then US$1 or US$2 is just a fixed fee to MakerDAO. Because then you would just have to set up the website…
27:03 — Juan Guillén: There’s some topics that I would like to discuss, especially concerning the exclusivity and potential stop of activities. This brings me to one central point that we may want to touch upon later… While this may sound like a great idea, and maybe it is… I don’t if I am personally in measure of actually evaluating this, and I’m almost sure that most MKR Holders don’t want to. So that’s why I saw this more of as a kind of agreement between some Core Unit that deals with this type of things, and they can discuss with you and potentially other people and say “Hey, this is great. We’re doing the due diligence, we evaluate these guys…” — so it’s more like the same way we are delegating to Séb for Real-world assets…
33:20 — PaperImperium: My questions are: first, where does the MakerDAO logo, swag, artwork, and stuff… where does that IP reside now? And secondly, anything that’s cooked up for this, whether your relationship to the DAO would — should any ties be severed in the future, where would those designs for t-shirts, mugs, whatever, where would they go? Because if it’s classified as a work for hire, it would reside with whatever legal entity is doing business on behalf of MakerDAO, whereas if it’s just a straight-up licensing agreement, it would probably reside with the artists, though of course it would also include intellectual property that belongs to MakerDAO
38:12 — The one concern that comes up to me is that, if the Maker logo intellectual property is open-source, this doesn’t grant us control of messaging with the brand; but at the same time association with us… the big thing that we are offering you is a competitive advantage, however big or small it may end up being with the use of the URL… Seems like perhaps it might be better for you just to rent the URL from us rather than go through all this and have a more at-arm’s-lenght relationship rather than try to make this a Core Unit, since it doesn’t grant us any additional messaging power if anybody with an etsy shop is free to set up their own swag
46:15 — LongForWisdom: I think people will be understanding of stuff like this. If you get signed up as a Core Unit now, and later it turns out that it probably falls below the threshold of what makes sense as a Core Unit, I think people will be understanding and you’ll just get shuffled into a different structure but will remain the same
48:27 — iammeeoh: I have one question that I think it’s related to what you were discussing: What if we vote for this Core Unit to be formed and to run but we change our mind in one year or six months? What about your business? Would you accept to stop selling merchandising about Maker or with a logo of Maker…? Basically to stop the business. Would you ask us for a time frame of six months of notice before asking you to stop?
50:11 — Payton Rose: This proposal is kind of unique in that you’re proposing no funds from the DAO, so I guess initially there wouldn’t be that kind of automatic retesting or reevaluation phase. I think that could be some valuable feedback, just say “hey, let’s either put this up for vote or have a community report”, or do something six months out as a retrospective
51:28 — PaperImperium: Maybe we can just come up with a nice fixed rate, make it easier for everybody… I mean, there’s nothing wrong with having an official shop, but it seems like if we can’t grant you an exclusive license, much less enforce one, that also means this is much less of a symbiotic relationship and more of just a straight up licensing deal…
54:23 — iammeeoh: I think the idea of the Core Unit originally was, you know, you have some contributors that do something for MakerDAO and you want to structure this group of contributors in a way that’s scalable, so the people inside this Core Unit work and they are coordinated by this Facilitator who is in charge of communicating with Governance. That’s the general idea. Everybody is free t do whatever they want in the ecosystem of Ethereum, of DeFi, of MakerDAO. It’s not a partnership, basically
56:15 — Andrew Burban: I want to look back around to the idea of the marketing… Is there going to be a maketing Core Unit? I guess there is none right now. This could maybe be like the subsidiary of the marketing team. I do like the idea of this being a Core Unit. Maybe this would be a subdivision of what marketing is rather than looking for a rent relationship…
Mike and Coulter, where can people find you if they want to give you feedback or get in touch with you? (58:46). Thank you for coming.
@blimpa produced this summary. Everyone who spoke and presented on the call, listed in the headers.
If “Skale” can have a SHOP–why can’t Maker have one?