Pro or Con Burn?

avatar

The new Splinterlands proposal to start burning 25,000 packs a day or until sold out, is an interesting one, as at least at first glance, it changes a couple of economic dynamics, as well as has the potential to alter behavior of players and investors.

Firstly, for a little background though, out of the initial 15M packs, there are still 4.7M left unsold, even though they have also been distributed as rewards, though I am unsure how many of the total have been "sold" this way. The burn would start December 1st until March 31st, with the 25,000 packs burned daily, added to the "sold" total. The card values have dropped significantly since release, which aligns with the bearish market trend of crypto as a whole.

  1. Buying packs in-game costs $4 (but buying with DEC currently makes it ~$2.50)
  2. Buying on the secondary market is $2

The difference is that the packs bought in game add to the airdrop of ew cards, but the secondary market bought packs do not. This is something that might get interesting, but I will get to that later.

image.png

Since I am a Negative Nancy, I will start with some of the initial cons I see, which aren't necessarily all bad, but you know - gotta start somewhere.

Cons

  • Cards are needed for Land
    This might take a lot of the cards off the market and will leave people short come land staking release. However, this can drive a bit of FOMO and, according to most, it is unlikely that land can be fully packed with maxed cards straight up anyway. But burning them now, means that the team might not be expecting staking on Land any time soon.

  • It makes demand for Splinterlands look weak
    And the impression of weak demand can make people think twice about investing. While the current demand of Chaos Legion is relatively weak, the demand for Splinterlands itself is quite strong, especially considering that there have been other releases that have soaked up a lot of investor money, including the release of Riftwatchers (so far 850K sold - 500K gone in just over a minute), Runi (2000 spot whitelist sold in 1.5 minutes) and the release of Tower Defense (No idea, but it raked in millions).

  • Done to appease the masses
    The masses make Splinterlands and it is good that they are putting the proposal system to use, but it is also good to remember that most people are not business people, and Splinterlands is a business. Sure, some of them have a lot of assets worth a lot of money that could make them appear wealthy and knowledgeable investors, but it is also good to note that a lot of early players didn't put that much directly into the game and what they have put in since, is derived from what they got cheap or even for free.

  • Engage panic mode
    This can also look like a panic move, where due to them not selling fast enough or the decline in market prices on cards, they are looking to prop up the economy by creating more scarcity, which to do so, goes back on their advertised release. This might make people happy as card prices increase, but it also demonstrates a certain amount of indecision from the Team about the best course of action for the game, market and community. Leave it up to the community to decide and if it goes wrong, we are not culpable.

Pros

  • Gets them out of the way
    While this wouldn't technically mean "selling out", it will appear that was and perhaps even be remembered by many that way, as it is added to the total sales. It is a bit of a trick with numbers, but memories fade.

  • Deadlines cause FOMO
    Putting a time limit on the print will mean that people have more incentive to get in before that point, or miss out entirely. Runi will have a similar time limit mechanism, meaning that out of the possible 6500, any unsold ones after 30 days of go-live, will be burned. This means that you can wait until the 11th hour, but not past the twelfth. When there is no time limit, there is "always tomorrow".

  • Earlier Airdrops of the "bonus" cards
    This will be welcome, as at the rate it feels like the drops are coming, people are losing interest, especially as more releases have happened since. However, this also raises some interesting questions as to what number of packs are required for the drop, as essentially, the ones that are burned won't attract airdrops. This means that even if the amount of packs needed to qualify stays the same (I think it was 550 last time), there will be up to 4.7M packs less drawing on them. This means that the expected scarcity will increase, the more packs that are burned.

  • Scarcity increases value
    Let's face it, people want an ROI, not be left holding bags. Scarcity can lead to that return in value, even if it can be short-sighted and cause other issues down the road. However, similarly to during the crypto bullrun in 2021, sharp increases in value generate hype and could attract more attention to Splinterlands. Though, I don't think that even if all CL were burned today, it would make much difference in the current market.

  • Almost fixed release of Rebellion
    Rebellion will not be released within three months of the end of the burn, but this also indicates that they are ready to release very close to that point, which means that there is around 8 months until Rebellion will be released and people will have a chance to prepare for it.

What will people do?

I don't know, but I guess it depends on where they stand with their investment now. For example, I have a full Chaos Legion deck and 4100 cards bought in-game, so will get at least most of the cards required for a max that I need to play in diamond and above. But, if the future summoners are going to be scarcer, it also means that buying the extras I need will be more expensive. It also means that they won't be getting released through pack sales, so even the ones that are releases in the first millions, will be that much more scarce.

For the investors who are speculating on future price, burning is of course good as it increases scarcity, but will they extend their position? Will those with purchase counts close to the cusp of getting an additional summoner buy a few more packs, considering that summoners will be scarcer? And if these legendary summoners are scarcer, what will that mean for when Land is finally able to absorb cards through staking - as summoners are going to be at a premium?

With all of the pack sales and burn questions, the biggest factor that needs to be considered is the release of land for staking, but that doesn't seem to have a clear timeline yet. If there is one thing that is going to drive scarcity and FOMO, it is that and at that point, it would be clear whether or not there were too many Chaos Legion packs. However, I don't think the number of Rebellion packs has been announced yet, so that means, they can always add a few million into that release to make up for it, but that is obviously not an ideal solution either.

Anyway, I will likely vote yes on the proposal as despite the cons, it is probably better to have an end date to finish this release once and for all, rather than letting it drag. People still will have five full months from now to get CL packs if they choose and when the cut-off comes, no one can really complain they didn't have the opportunity.

What are you seeing as the pros and cons?

Taraz
[ Gen1: Hive ]



0
0
0.000
67 comments
avatar
(Edited)

I don't mind this as a move personally.

The way I look at it is that Splinterlands has a core group of players that vacuum up anything new... but that core has a ceiling obviously. So by burning CL packs by March 31st, the Splinterlands team can launch Rebellion on July 1st (or later) and that core group will buy up a stack of those news packs, injecting new funds (that they wouldn't spend on more CL packs) into the Splinterlands company .

These pack editions (plus new things like Runis) are really the only way for Splinterlands the company to make money... so at some point they are going to run out of the revenue they made from CL (and TD and Runi) and will need Rebellion to be released. To be honest I'm surprised this is even a community vote.

0
0
0.000
avatar

but that core has a ceiling obviously.

Especially with so many releases at the same time.

and that core group will buy up a stack of those news packs, injecting new funds (that they wouldn't spend on more CL packs) into the Splinterlands company .

And as said, they are still a business - they still have to pay staff.

I don't think Runi would have made them that much, but yes, they have to build saleable assets to survive. At some point though, they also have to find that balance because there is a roof there also.

0
0
0.000
avatar

I guess 6000 Runi at $500 each (minus the half-price Allowlist people) is still probably around the quarter mill mark for business revenue, but I honestly see it more as a marketing move than a legit business venture. I'm sure they'll make more than they spent on it and then the increased exposure will definitely help.

But yeah, I'd love to know how much revenue they make is from repeat business (ie, the core gamers that vacuum up anything new) and how much is new business. I'd take a wild stab that it's like 80% superfans.

0
0
0.000
avatar

A quarter mil doesn't go far with 70-odd people. So yes, it is more about the exposure than anything else.

And the superfans, are they putting new money in, or are they using what they have earned through SL?

0
0
0.000
avatar
(Edited)

Yeah, that's a really great question.

When I made that comment I was thinking that it was new money. The vast majority of pack purchases I've made have been new money, but I could truly been in the minority there. I honestly have no idea. So many interesting data points.

I had assumed that the price of CL on the secondary market would go above $4 once CL sold out... but if Rebellion is only 3 months away that might not be the case at all... and if it's not, I'm not sure as many people will buy Rebellion as an resale investment like they have in the past.

0
0
0.000
avatar

The vast majority of pack purchases I've made have been new money, but I could truly been in the minority there. I honestly have no idea.

I am with you, but I have been in less than 1.5 years, so haven't built up assets that return much. However, a lot of the biggest holders didn't pay nearly what their assets are worth and return today, so they are always up for getting more, plus they get larger drops of other assets, like SPS.

There really needs to be some demand on the packs for more than just playing or, a million new players :)

0
0
0.000
avatar

I honestly see it more as a marketing move than a legit business venture

I think this was the primary focus too. Hopefully some new deep pockets have taken an interest, although I wouldn't know how to check this.

0
0
0.000
avatar

To be honest I'm surprised this is even a community vote.

And yeah, I think it is a calculated vote, meaning it is pretty sure to pass.

0
0
0.000
avatar

Fact: The proposal will pass.

Fact: The proposal gives an expiration date for CL and gives a start date for RB packs. Second is more important than the first, as any business not only requires a revenue stream, it also need to project its future revenue. Because businesses are valued at a multiple of their future earning and/or revenue, not present earning/revenue.

I have a need for buying additional packs for my land position, so this gives me an immediate actionable trigger, whether I like it or not.

I think that's the most important fact.

0
0
0.000
avatar

I wonder how many are similarly looking at the deadline and thinking - I need to get some more before...

For the business model to work, there is going to have to be more than card sales in the future I think.

0
0
0.000
avatar

there is going to have to be more than card sales in the future I think.

Absolutely! But so far, that is really the only source of revenue. Also this is the ONE ITEM they are good at and have perfected over the years. During tough time you play at your strength, that part is always true.

0
0
0.000
avatar

I wonder what it will be that keeps it ticking over. However, give it 30 million players and card sales are enough. However, how many players could keep up?

0
0
0.000
avatar
(Edited)

3000 :)

and 300 of them are investor...

you see, funny at todays official SL post :)

image.png

not the same thing, but funny, 300 shows up :)

0
0
0.000
avatar

Hi @azircon - why do you need additional packs for your land position? Aren't you more likely going to need to max out particular cards to work your land? Would you just buy them direct from the second hand market?

0
0
0.000
avatar

trouble is I have 1115 land plots, if I start buying cards from the market I will buy up the entire market and drain large amount of my savings :)

It will be party for the rest of you, but I am not quite there yet :)

0
0
0.000
avatar

Hahaha, okay, now I see. So getting cards in card packs might actually be cheaper than buying all the cheapest cards on the secondary market.

0
0
0.000
avatar

yes, for certain, for large purchases

0
0
0.000
avatar

It is a good thing!! I always thought that they printed too many packs and this is a way to reduce them and we will see a increase of value in less time... I am holding packs because I want to sell those when they are sold out at price of 10+ so for me is a good thing if it sold out fast

0
0
0.000
avatar

But, will people pay 10 dollars for CL packs when Rebellion is only 3 months away?

0
0
0.000
avatar

That is a good question, it could be.

It could not be. Market will tell, but even with rebellion out I could wait even more time until it hits the price ( if it does)

0
0
0.000
avatar

I don't see why people would buy CL packs at $10 with Rebellion 3 months away. CL packs wouldn't give access to airdropped cards whereas Rebellion packs would.

0
0
0.000
avatar

CL packs wouldn't give access to airdropped cards whereas Rebellion packs would.

This is a good point.

0
0
0.000
avatar

I try to make at least one good point per week.

0
0
0.000
avatar

I'm not sure yet, I think there is an element to the proposal regarding maxed cards in leagues for rewards - the value of cards should go up as people need combined decks.

0
0
0.000
avatar

Yes that is how I see it, but as people are convinced that full staking won't be possible early on, it will mean that they can have several pack releases between.

0
0
0.000
avatar

Perhaps then it is a deliberate move to increase card prices. Lower supply, increased demand. It does sound like it's come out of a commerce textbook.

0
0
0.000
avatar

Yeah, I think it is to increase values.

0
0
0.000
avatar

Today I sold several hundred packs of Chaos for 4 Hive. You should have written this post a few hours earlier)

0
0
0.000
avatar

I think many players and investors will try to hoard and resell if they learned about this proposal.

0
0
0.000
avatar

But, with the next series release not far behind, will there be a resell market?

0
0
0.000
avatar

I think it is possible if the price of the next release will be too expensive for players.

0
0
0.000
avatar

Maybe, but it also means that CL on secondary markets won't be above the cost of Rebellion packs in-game and in-game packs come with bonuses.

0
0
0.000
avatar

is there a target price for rebellion already?

0
0
0.000
avatar

I'm not sure its necessary. We've had so many sales in such a short space of time; and the final 2 million CL packs would likely get snapped up by short term flippers.
I feel like we're overstating the stagnation. I'd prefer to see 15 million play out; but I trust the devs on this. I'll vote with Yaba.

0
0
0.000
avatar

I feel like we're overstating the stagnation.

This was the conversation I had in Discord. Get Land staking released and see what happens.

0
0
0.000
avatar

I agree that I do not think this proposal is necessary, but it will get passed as people are impatient and want things to happen now, all the time.

Instead of burning the packs, they could swap the DEC ranked rewards to the CL packs. The top players might hate me if it happens, but this takes more DEC generation out of the system.

0
0
0.000
avatar

They are earning enough SPS from playing though :D

0
0
0.000
avatar

I think all needs to have a time limit.

It is also just as important to not over release new stuff and tap people out/ and compete against existing investments.

0
0
0.000
avatar

This is another good point - perhaps all releases should have a time limit on them.

0
0
0.000
avatar

I joined the game way after the land sale.

Do I need to own the land to stake cards?

How many summoners and cards total can I stake per land?

0
0
0.000
avatar

The land will be set up like a battle, summoner + 6 monsters

Not sure about ownership, it might be possible to rent land.

I came in late too and paid a massive premium for the few plots I have.

0
0
0.000
avatar

Does the quality of the cards matter? Like really low market value card vs. high market value cards (power etc are the same). I assume you don’t battle so abilities won’t matter as much.

If so it would be interesting, like a new floor price (hopefully higher) and doesn’t impact already sought after cards.

0
0
0.000
avatar
(Edited)

The quality of the cards will matter. A maxed out Gold-Foil Alpha card will produce a higher percentage of resources than a maxed out Common CL card.

0
0
0.000
avatar

Each plot would require a summoner and 6 monsters?!?

I thought land would have one monster per plot. Whoa! I am so incredibly unprepared for this now...

0
0
0.000
avatar

Yep!!

As said, it is going to be a massive sink for cards. If all had maxed cards on them with a range of qualities, it would be something like 60 million BCX

0
0
0.000
avatar

I'm honestly floored by this.

I did not know it was going to be like this at all... it'll be interesting to see if the benefits of Land outweigh the benefits of playing with 7 maxed cards. I really had no idea summoners would be involved in Land at all. I'm a little shaken...

0
0
0.000
avatar

It'll be fine

I am going to have to raid my playing deck for some - but that is only for the max. I have some lower level ones if it is going to take ramping up.

0
0
0.000
avatar

Real world TCG games suffered from the "Printer-Go-Brrrr" syndrome during the excessive FIAT printing.
We are now in an "allegedly" contracting financial market. I say, "allegedly", as there are creaks, and groans, that the global market will crack. Just like a drug addict going through withdrawal or a gambler running out of funds.

Anyway, the TCGs that are adjusting well have released smaller batches of their product (Flesh & Blood for example) to maintain a stable price.

The benefit of a digital format is that it is virtual. Burning packs helps reduce the qty to the demand that the market wants.
I recall @aggroed making a comment or two about the guidance he received to set a larger pack goal. Initially, the market responded with gusto. Again, I recall trend predicting the entire set would sell by a certain month.

However, new product, bear market, global uncertainties, and so forth, has provided the opportunity to burn packs.

Opportunity? Yes, we get to see how the market behaves with these kinds of moves.

If there are plans to issue a Main Set, followed by a Mini Set, then a burn is necessary. The timeline allows the market to determine whether they want more packs entering the market.

Of course the negatives you list will exist. But, this is an evolving market. Turning over sets is crucial to a TCG to keep momentum & keep up interest & make revenue to invest into future projects.

Transparency is the best policy. The community voting is an awesome initiative that the real world TCGs tend to lack.
(Another reason Flesh & Blood is able to evolve is that they listen to their player base.)

Overall, lessons will be learned, there will be winners and losers. That is what happens with a successful product. I'd rather the sound of earnest debate than the echoes of a barren cavern of disinterest.

0
0
0.000
avatar

Pretty sure the economy is going to collapse more before it improves - but I am often wrong too :)

I think this will be the first set that doesn't sell through, and therefore first burn right? That in itself is going to be a point of interest.

And yes, I sagree that transparency is good and to listen to the playerbase, but also, don't get into a position where one becomes a hostage to public opinion. So many businesses these days are in that position and people are far less committed than they previously were. So many people make emotional decisions on what are relatively trivial things and burn all their bridges.

I haven't been in SL that long, but I here stories of people selling everything they had based on game decisions, only to see that they were wrong after all and the game went on and thrived.

0
0
0.000
avatar

Agree!! The tail should never wag the dog. 😀

0
0
0.000
avatar

And this feels like a lot of dog wagging

0
0
0.000
avatar

I think that pros outweigh the cons. I wonder how many copies of Rebellion will be made.

0
0
0.000
avatar

I wonder how many copies of Rebellion will be made.

I don't think this has been announced yet, but I assume it will scale depending on what happens just prior.

0
0
0.000
avatar

I agree with all the pros and cons. My only regret is that I won't have time to buy more summoners in that time. I'm afraid the price will go up, and I don't have that much money yet((.

0
0
0.000
avatar

Summoners are going to be at a premium at some point, but unsure when that will be. You have some time perhaps :)

0
0
0.000
avatar

I am on the fence on this one. I’ve invested a lot into the game since its inception, the most in the past year I would say but it’s a bear market right now and people are tight. The extra money isn’t flying around like it was a year ago when we saw ATH’s left and right. I think we should be a little cautious rather than reactionary.

At the same time I think that the packs have slowed to a crawl and I don’t know who’s buying them versus getting them in rewards. It’s definitely got something to do with the increased price per pack. That really annoyed me, as doubling the price puts a lot of people out of reach of getting a bunch. It certainly eliminates my desire to buy the packs out of the store and instead just buy cards or wait until I get them in rewards.

0
0
0.000
avatar

I think we should be a little cautious rather than reactionary.

I agree, but if they think Land staking is a long way away still, this is might be their way to keep people happy in the meantime.

The packs are getting really expensive, especially considering the market conditions and the print runs....

0
0
0.000
avatar

Interestingly, I wrote a post not so long ago about how slow the packs were crawling (https://peakd.com/hive-13323/@relf87/when-will-chaos-legion-packs-sell-out) and people thought I was "crazy" even though I had data to back my view.

If you asked me, I think there's almost nobody buying the CL packs, because 1) the CL packs on secondary market is much cheaper and the premium for the slim airdrop chances just doesn't add up in my view so most people would likely buy on the secondary market, 2) given a choice, I would rather buy Riftwatchers over Chaos because the cards are much better. The reason why the CL numbers are still inching up is because of the chest rewards.

I am not sure why they need to rush things though, why can't Rebellion wait until 2024? As controversial as it may sounds, I think it could be because they needed revenue to sustain the business and perhaps the amount of funds now will run out by next year so they needed new revenue by then? On a day to day basis, while I am not sure how much salary the team gets, the revenue does seems very little if not for the recent presales. There are only about 15-20 spellbooks purchased a day and that's 150-200 USD a day. And no one's buying CL packs. So that's the best speculation I had.

Personally I am not fond of the recent proposals but that's another topic for another day. The number of active players are clearly on the decline and I believe the stats speak for themselves.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts too!

0
0
0.000
avatar

The Rebellion card edition is how the Splinterlands company makes it's money.

0
0
0.000
avatar

There are some people still buying them in large-ish quantities, but not that many. And for many of the smaller players who don't need full sets, it is far cheaper to buy them as singles in the marketplace.

As controversial as it may sounds, I think it could be because they needed revenue to sustain the business and perhaps the amount of funds now will run out by next year so they needed new revenue by then?

It isn't controversial, it is the case. However, the current player base can't sustain them forever, there needs to be an influx of new players willing to buy.

Should be an interesting year ahead...

0
0
0.000
avatar

great article thanks taraz. nice to see all of the pros and cons. personally, id rather not see the cards burned. i think there are some other uses they could be put to (uses that could benefit the community). but understand thats not the way to wind is blowing.

0
0
0.000
avatar

It can also come down to that these are digital assets, so they aren't really burning much that can't be replaced. Push out the Rebellion release supply a bit, release a min-set of cards and they will not only replace them, but also have in-demand packs - rather than CL. Remember, most of the people who need a lot of cards, have already bought a lot of cards.

0
0
0.000