• Forum has been upgraded, all links, images, etc are as they were. Please see Official Announcements for more information

Pre-Proposal Discussion: Wall of Coins Integration

Ryan Taylor

Well-known member
Foundation Member
Over the past couple of months, Genitrust - the owner of the Wall of Coins service - has proposed integrating Dash into its services and website. See the original proposal from August here: https://www.dash.org/forum/threads/dash-otc-exchange-wall-of-coins-website-and-api.10454/

However, these proposals were rejected by the network. Although it is impossible to know the rationale behind every masternode owner's vote, through a combination of reading forum posts and talking with investors, it seems there were several primary reasons leading to the rejection:

1) The proposal cost was quite high at approximately $82,000, and contained uncertainty over whether additional expenses would be requested to complete the project (e.g., cost overruns)
2) The budget was paid directly to Genitrust and therefore offered little protection against project execution risks
3) Because of the high level of funding requested, it would necessitate "knocking out" other valuable proposals, including essential core team functions' proposals

However, most people seem to agree that a Wall of Coins integration would be a valuable addition to Dash's ecosystem, enabling direct cash-to-Dash purchases at literally tens of thousands of locations (e.g., banks, money transmitters), introducing Dash to Wall of Coin's 16,000 active users across seven countries (United States, Canada, Germany, Argentina, Latvia, Poland, and the Philippines), and adding Dash to Wall of Coins' API which will enable Genitrust's business partners to more easily adopt Dash.

Therefore, the Dash core team has been engaged with Wall of Coins over the last two months to reach a mutually-agreeable set of terms that will finally enable Dash to integrate into their platform. We are pleased to announce that we've arrived at a more favorable set of terms that we hope the network will find agreeable and which substantially reduces the risks posed from project delivery. We plan to introduce a proposal to the network within the next day. While that is happening, we wanted to make the basic information public as quickly as possible to 1) allow more time for the network to debate and put forward remaining questions and concerns, and 2) let the network know this larger expense / proposal is forthcoming since we are getting rather close to the November 4th budget cycle.

The general terms of the proposal would consist of the following:

1) The project cost will be reduced to $57,918 spread evenly across three payments of $19,306 each in the November, December, and January budget cycles. The original proposal was 42% higher than the current figure, so this represents a substantial reduction.

2) The Dash core team will submit the proposal to the network on Genitrust's behalf, and all funds will be paid to the core team rather than Genitrust directly. The core team will act as stewards of the funds, which will be released to Genitrust based on a set of criteria (which are outlined below).

3) The Dash core team will "make room" in the budget to better accommodate Wall of Coins integration expenses by limiting its requests, which traditionally we restrict to 80% of the total budget. By relying on existing funds and managing the expenses on other projects, we seek to include Wall of Coins within the 80% of the total budget limit.

4) Genitrust will be responsible for project communication to the community and for any cost overruns associated with the integration, while the Dash core team will provide limited technical assistance to ensure existing software tools and technical expertise is available to help lower the execution risk for Genitrust.

5) Detailed criteria for release of funds, milestones, and project completion measures will be negotiated in good faith between Genitrust and the core team produce a granular project plan with milestones and deliverables. These will be defined in a way that will be externally verifiable to the extent possible, and will roughly align with the timeline previously outlined by Genitrust in their previous proposal at https://www.dropbox.com/s/chddplecnxh9xed/dash-adoption-tools.pdf?dl=0. Payment #1 will be released immediately at the start of the project and the project plan will be the first activity undertaken by the team. Payments #2 and #3 will be based on the completion of the project plan.

6) Genitrust will accept all currency risk associated with the project between the time the proposal is submitted and the funds are paid.

Completion of the work is expected by early February. The main risk associated with this arrangement is that all payments are distributed in advance of the work being completed. However, by ensuring progress is made between each payment, we can provide assurances that by the time the third payment is distributed, Genitrust will have completed roughly 2/3rds of the work and would have large disincentives to discontinue work under those circumstances (not to mention the reputation impact they would suffer). This arrangement provides protection for Genitrust as well against defunding if the work is being executed according to their plan. Genitrust requested this protection because they are carrying the cost of any regulatory, legal, and cost overrun expenses.

I will share the full set of terms and post the proposal within the next 24 hours as time permits. In the meantime, feel free to debate the merits of the proposal and ask any questions. I will do my best to answer them as I have time. Please include @babygiraffe for any posts in which you are seeking my reply.
 
While I'm excited at the prospect of integrating with Wall of Coins, I'm concerned about a couple of issues (primarily financial). Look at September's budget report (I've removed the ATM Program and Legal Proposal, since they have already been funded). What remains is the core, must-have functions. Also, you'll notice there are no business development funds included, nor are there any travel funds included.

Core Team Budget Items:

Core Development - Electrum & Sentinel (Sept) -- DASH DENOMINATED
https://www.dash.org/forum/threads/proposal-core-development-electrum-sentinel-sept.10292/
This proposal funds the ongoing support and maintenance of Electrum wallet and also provides support to the Core development team for Sentinel - 66.17 Dash

Core Development - 12.2 DashDrive Developers (Sept) -- $4200
https://www.dash.org/forum/threads/proposal-core-development-12-2-dashdrive-developers-sept.10288/
Funds sub-contracted developers to accelerate the Evolution development timeline - 355.74 Dash

Infrastructure - Datacenter (Sept) -- $625
https://www.dash.org/forum/threads/proposal-infrastructure-datacenter-sept.10291/
Provides continued funding for cloud infrastructure and server hosting services - 51.73 Dash

Marketing, International Outreach & Promotion (Sep.) -- $2550
https://www.dash.org/forum/threads/proposal-marketing-international-outreach-promotion-sep.10268/
This proposal continues international outreach funding and was expanded to include wiki and video translations - 211.87

Infrastructure - Liquidity Providers (Sept) -- $350
https://www.dash.org/forum/threads/proposal-infrastructure-liquidity-providers-sept.10287/
Ongoing funding for our PrivateSend liquidity providers to speed mixing - 27.98 Dash

PR Fall Campaign (Sept) -- $5600
https://www.dash.org/forum/threads/proposal-pr-fall-campaign-sept.10284/
Provides funding for a public relations contract expected to run through the fall - 464.66 Dash

Evolution Development - Subcontractors (Sept) -- $1900
https://www.dash.org/forum/threads/proposal-evolution-development-subcontractors-sept.10432/
Funds sub-contracted developers to accelerate the Evolution development timeline - 159.45 Dash

Core Team Budget - 1,176 Dash (ongoing)

Dash-Lamassu ATM Integration - 610.26 DASH (payment #9 of 12)

This totals to $15,225 + 1,850 DASH per month. During September, this equaled roughly 3120 DASH. However, at today's exchange rate, that would equal 3575 DASH. Should we drop back down to 0.01 BTC/DASH (roughly $6.50), that Core Team would then require 4200 DASH for its normal commitments. If Core Team reserves no more than 5960 DASH per month, and we're committing to including Wall of Coins into that 5960 limit, then that will reduce the funds available to Core Team to:

5960 Limit
- 2145 for Wall of Coins
____
Leaves 3814 DASH for Core Team's essential functions. At today's exchange rate, Core Team requires at least 3575 DASH. If the price falls further, some Core Team projects will need to be significantly impaired.

How can we be sure that the vital functions of Core Team will not be impacted by Wall of Coins' proposal? How can we be sure Evo development won't be impacted?

Also, while it's generous for Genitrust to say they accept the exchange rate risk, in a time of falling prices that show no sign of stopping, how can Genitrust possibly guarantee that? If the price of DASH drops even further, Genitrust could find themselves getting only a fraction of the funds they need to develop this project. If it costs Genitrust $19,306 per month to develop this, and we allocate 2145 DASH per month for Wall of Coins ($19,306 currently), and DASH drops to $6.50, then how can Genitrust possibly continue development with such substantially reduced funding? If it costs $19,306 per month to develop this integration, then how can they possibly get buy on a hypothetical $13,942?

Dash's rapid price decline is going to wreak havoc on the budget system if it continues much longer, and history suggests that continued declines are possible in the near term. Aren't we risking painting ourselves into a corner with this commitment? Not only could Core Team end up being inadequately funded, but Genitrust could also fail to find the needed funding (in fiat terms).
 
While I'm excited at the prospect of integrating with Wall of Coins, I'm concerned about a couple of issues (primarily financial). Look at September's budget report (I've removed the ATM Program and Legal Proposal, since they have already been funded). What remains is the core, must-have functions. Also, you'll notice there are no business development funds included, nor are there any travel funds included.



This totals to $15,225 + 1,850 DASH per month. During September, this equaled roughly 3120 DASH. However, at today's exchange rate, that would equal 3575 DASH. Should we drop back down to 0.01 BTC/DASH (roughly $6.50), that Core Team would then require 4200 DASH for its normal commitments. If Core Team reserves no more than 5960 DASH per month, and we're committing to including Wall of Coins into that 5960 limit, then that will reduce the funds available to Core Team to:

5960 Limit
- 2145 for Wall of Coins
____
Leaves 3814 DASH for Core Team's essential functions. At today's exchange rate, Core Team requires at least 3575 DASH. If the price falls further, some Core Team projects will need to be significantly impaired.

How can we be sure that the vital functions of Core Team will not be impacted by Wall of Coins' proposal? How can we be sure Evo development won't be impacted?

Also, while it's generous for Genitrust to say they accept the exchange rate risk, in a time of falling prices that show no sign of stopping, how can Genitrust possibly guarantee that? If the price of DASH drops even further, Genitrust could find themselves getting only a fraction of the funds they need to develop this project. If it costs Genitrust $19,306 per month to develop this, and we allocate 2145 DASH per month for Wall of Coins ($19,306 currently), and DASH drops to $6.50, then how can Genitrust possibly continue development with such substantially reduced funding? If it costs $19,306 per month to develop this integration, then how can they possibly get buy on a hypothetical $13,942?

Dash's rapid price decline is going to wreak havoc on the budget system if it continues much longer, and history suggests that continued declines are possible in the near term. Aren't we risking painting ourselves into a corner with this commitment? Not only could Core Team end up being inadequately funded, but Genitrust could also fail to find the needed funding (in fiat terms).
This is not completely accurate. Many of our commitments are denominated in Dash, such as core team salaries and most of the Evo / Core / Electrum development, so further reductions in the price would have limited impact on the core team's ability to meet these obligations. At this point in time, we have sufficient reserves that further funding for these items is not needed in the short term regardless of the WoC proposal. The Lamassau obligations end as of the December payment, which will open up additional funding at that time.

Concerning Genitrust, this is similar to many deals of the past (from SpectroCoin to most of the community proposals) in which the vendor or business partner accepts this risk. WoC happens to believe that Dash is more likely to increase in value than decrease over the period. A decrease would not release them from the obligation to complete the work. Also, keep in mind that the price change over the short term will be limited, and by the medium term (say two months from now) most of the work will be behind them and the remaining investment to a finished product gets closer to zero as time marches on. Only a rapid and sustained decrease in price could impact them substantially.
 
I've been a huge fan of Wall of Coins for a while now, and have been very public about my support for this proposal passing in its past iterations. Please pass this. It'll give Dash an edge over even Bitcoin.
 
This is not completely accurate. Many of our commitments are denominated in Dash, such as core team salaries and most of the Evo / Core / Electrum development, so further reductions in the price would have limited impact on the core team's ability to meet these obligations.

Yes, I understand that a significant part of Core Team funding is Dash-denominated, which is why I used the descriptor "xUSD + yDASH per month" above. The DASH denominated part of the budget will of course be stable regardless. From what I can determine based on past budget proposals, the following Core Team items are denominated in DASH (rounding off decimals):

DASH-denominated:

Core Team Payment: 1176 DASH
Lamassu: 610 DASH
Electrum & Sentinel: 66 DASH

The following appear to be USD-denominated based on the budget proposals, although I could definitely be mistaken on some of them:

USD-denominated:
12.2 DashDrive Developers: $5920
PR Fall Campaign: $6000
Liquidity Providers: $300
Evolution Subcontractors: $2870
Marketing, International Outreach: $2200
Business Development: $4090

That gives a total monthly cost of 1852 DASH + $21380. Since the $21380 has to be paid in DASH, the exchange rate will determine how many DASH are required to equal $21380. Last month, the exchange rate was roughly $11.50 per DASH, so the total Core Team budget (recurring items only) was approximately 1852 DASH + 1859 DASH = 3711 DASH. At today's exchange rate ($9.30), those same proposals would cost 1852 DASH + 2299 DASH = 4151 DASH. If our price drops lower, to say $6.50, the monthly Core Team recurring cost would be 1852 DASH + 3289 DASH = 5141 DASH.

We have committed to using no more than 80% of the budget for Core Team proposals, which limits us to 5960 DASH. With this proposal, we will be committing to including Wall of Coins within that 5960 DASH budget. That means that Wall of Coins' $19,306 per month will be, at today's exchange rate, 2076 DASH per month.

To summarize, we have only 5960 DASH allocated to Core Team, and this proposal will spend 2076 of those DASH, leaving 3884 DASH for the rest of Core Team's projects. Last month's expenditures, at today's exchange rate, would exceed that (4151 DASH required). This proposal is going to cut things really close, especially if the price keeps falling.

At this point in time, we have sufficient reserves that further funding for these items is not needed in the short term regardless of the WoC proposal. The Lamassau obligations end as of the December payment, which will open up additional funding at that time.

This is great news, and I defer to your judgment. I'm just concerned about the continual slipping of the exchange rate and how that affects our USD-denominated budgets. But if there is sufficient left over funding to cover it, then that's excellent!

Concerning Genitrust, this is similar to many deals of the past (from SpectroCoin to most of the community proposals) in which the vendor or business partner accepts this risk. WoC happens to believe that Dash is more likely to increase in value than decrease over the period. A decrease would not release them from the obligation to complete the work.

This is true; a decrease in price would not release them from their obligation, but it might prevent them from being able to complete it. There are a lot of individuals and companies with outstanding obligations and no funds to complete them. If Genitrust requires USD to pay their employees, for instance, and the exchange rate drops significantly, they may simply run out of money to make payroll. Sure, they'd be "obligated" to finish it, but they might not be able to.

Also, keep in mind that the price change over the short term will be limited, and by the medium term (say two months from now) most of the work will be behind them and the remaining investment to a finished product gets closer to zero as time marches on. Only a rapid and sustained decrease in price could impact them substantially.

We have been experiencing a very rapid and sustained decrease in price. Four days ago the price was around $10.60, and now it's at $9.30. A 14% decrease in four days, if extrapolated just a little further, could significantly impair Genitrust's funding, and thus their ability to complete the project.

The advantages to this proposal are obvious, and I'm sure they payoff will be significant. I just wanted to point out some of the possible difficulties. You mention that Core Team has sufficient funding, so I cede that point. My main concern now is Genitrust, and their financial ability to assume the exchange rate risk and still complete the project.
 
Back
Top