MIP-15: NFT Aggregator Development


Developing an NFT aggregator




Merit Circle is soon entering the NFT trading space with the release of the Sphere NFT Marketplace. Aggregators are a new tool for NFT trading. NFT aggregation is currently dominated by Gem, but there is plenty of opportunity for a new aggregator to enter the market. Together with Merit Circle, I want to develop an NFT aggregator that is user-friendly, and cheaper to use than any competitor. Having a well-developed NFT aggregator that natively integrates Sphere drives more volume to the marketplace, thereby generating more fees and revenue for the DAO.


With the soon-to-be released Sphere marketplace, the Merit Circle DAO is entering the NFT trading space. A major new development in NFT trading is NFT aggregation. These are platforms which are used to ‘sweep’ groups of NFTs across multiple marketplaces simultaneously. This is usually done by buying multiple NFTs for the lowest possible price. NFT aggregators are also developed with optimized gas costs and user experience. Taking these things into account, let’s look at what our NFT aggregator would look like.

We will develop an NFT aggregation platform featuring a user-friendly interface and satisfying user experience. The platform will have a simple order flow, in which the user can easily select the desired NFTs from any tradeable collection on multiple marketplaces. A shopping cart will efficiently show the selected NFTs, which the user can then purchase through an easy-to-use checkout area that also transparently shows all the fees. Optionally, users can select the currency they wish to pay with.

The user interface will be interacting with the back layer of our aggregator. Smart contracts will be gas-optimized in every way to ensure the lowest possible gas fees from our side. To facilitate the use of virtually any token for buying NFTs, contracts will interact with protocols such as Uniswap, in a secure and cheap way, without the user having to leave the platform.

The aggregator’s user interface and smart contract structure creates a cheap, and user-friendly, platform to buy NFTs. To further enhance the core functionality of buying NFTs, the platform will be equipped with a rich set of advanced features.

Data & analytics
Sweeping the floor price of NFTs in one transaction, thereby saving on gas fees and headache, is only one aspect of aggregators. Another important aspect is the data available on NFTs, collections, and traders. Although most users will just blindly purchase the cheapest NFTs available in a collection, data is vital to learn which collections are becoming popular, and which NFTs could be lucrative to buy. Our aggregator will equip sweepers with data and analytical tools to discover trends, rare NFTs, and rising or declining collection popularity. Data which can be expected includes but is not limited to: traits, rarity, pricing, and historic data. The aggregator will also be equipped with messaging services to notify users when a certain NFT has become available for purchase. Users will also be able to see collection-wide statistics which demonstrate the distribution of the NFTs, as well as charts to show trends in trading activity and floor prices.

User profile
The aggregator will not only be an efficient tool to buy NFTs, but will also house interactive social features. Users will be able to follow each other, talk to each other in a troll box, and view each other’s trading activity and collected NFTs. The user profile pages are composed of aggregated data: pre-filled username and profile picture from marketplaces, statistics from games, and the possibility to set an NFT as a profile picture (or dress up an NFT character and save it as a profile picture). There are several creative ways to gamify the social part of the platform, and we will be experimenting with several features, such as spendable sweeping incentives.

Aggregate more
The platform aggregates NFT trades on multiple chains, starting with Ethereum and expanding to Polygon, Avalanche, and other chains with NFT trading activity. Both Gem and Genie are currently only deployed on Ethereum, but will likely expand to more chains, especially considering OpenSea alone is also deployed on Polygon, Solana, and Klaytn. A good technological architecture is needed to make sure data is being collected and made available for the chains that are being integrated, without jeopardizing performance and security of the overall platform.

We will integrate marketplaces on all supported chains, starting with 12 marketplaces on Ethereum, including Sphere, OpenSea, and LooksRare. All NFTs that are for sale on these marketplaces will be purchasable on the aggregator, and will be further detailed with pricing data, rarity ranking, and past activity.

Other than NFT trading, aggregation of other decentralized NFT use-cases will be developed at a later stage. A few use-cases that can be expected are the aggregation of NFT-lending protocols, and breeding and staking of NFTs on various protocols and games.

We will not charge a fee on top of the fees paid for the NFT purchases. Instead, we will focus on acquiring a large user base, which, at a later stage, will be monetizable with fees on premium features, advertisements, and sponsored integrations. Gem and Genie do not charge an extra fee for the trades aggregated on their platform, therefore it would not make any sense for us to do this either. Instead, by having an efficient and easy-to-use NFT aggregation platform with interactive social features, we aim to capture most of the volume traded through aggregators. This will strengthen the position of our aggregator in the NFT space, and increase its potential value.

I have already been researching and developing smart contracts, which currently have cheaper gas fees than Gem. The alpha version of the aggregator can be launched in roughly 3 months. This version will be launched on Ethereum, and have the necessary features for a user-friendly way of sweeping NFTs. Subsequently , the platform will be expanded with the envisioned data, tools, multi-chain architecture, and social features. We will share and maintain a detailed list of proposed, requested, and implemented features on the platform.

Merit Circle
Merit Circle and I will actively work together to bring this NFT aggregator to life. In the startup phase, Merit Circle will help with branding, design, and closing a pre-seed equity funding round. I will focus mainly on developing the platform, expanding the team, and making the smart contracts even cheaper than they already are. Furthermore, Merit Circle will be 1 of the signers of the aggregator’s multi-sig wallet, thereby taking an active role in the management of the funds.

Gem has grown from 212.5K visits in January to 3 million visits in April (source: Semrush). These are promising metrics, but if our aggregator intends to outperform these numbers, we will require fast and scalable servers that can deliver content with minimum latency. Therefore, a few things are very important. Firstly, the code must be optimized to collect and provide data efficiently. Secondly, the data that is being stored, must be stored within a good data structure. We will be using a high-performance database engine to complement this.Lastly, the servers must be protected from outside usage and possible attack (DDOS). Our basic architecture scaling will consist of having multiple servers, in multiple regions, to provide our users all over the world with the high performance platform they need.


The two leading NFT aggregators are Gem and Genie, which are respectively doing $200.37M and $32.32M in volume the past month (gem, genie). For reference, OpenSea did $1.34B in volume the past month. Genie is self-funded and being developed by a relatively small, but capable, team. Gem has been recently acquired by OpenSea and is expanding its features, team members, and marketplace integrations. High aggregator volume indicates that these aggregators do play a significant role in the NFT trading space. Thankfully, as NFT aggregation is such a new concept, there is still plenty of opportunity for a new aggregator to enter the space, simply by making a better, cheaper, and more interactive aggregator - such as the one I have described.

It goes without saying that the Merit Circle DAO Core Contributors, and community, are very capable, well-connected, and develop products that set a new precedent in the crypto space, in terms of branding and quality. Being a Meritian myself and having thoroughly discussed the aggregator with Mark, I believe Merit Circle is the best possible partner to develop this with. In return, the platform will be a unique NFT aggregator with the ambition and potential to become an industry leader. Having 50% of the equity in the aggregator allows Merit Circle to have a significant say in the development of the platform, as well as the potential for a large return on investment.

Other than the financial factors, working closely together allows for new technological findings to be shared with each other. This is something that can be especially interesting with the new Sphere marketplace arriving soon. As the development of the aggregator is heavily focused on reducing gas costs, and enhancing user experience, Merit Circle products could benefit from new findings and integrate the code into their codebases. Moreover, having an NFT aggregator that natively integrates Sphere drives more volume to the marketplace, thus generating more fees and revenue for the DAO.


The proposed budget is $50,000, which will be used to finance the startup phase. The Merit Circle DAO will receive 50% of the aggregator’s common shares. The $50,000 will be used for branding, design, and closing a pre-seed equity round to fund the complete development of the aggregator.


This is blockchain, equity doesn’t exist
Using equity instead of a token allows to quickly start on the development and launch of the NFT aggregator. It saves unnecessary stalling and allows us to focus on building.

There is no revenue to be captured with an aggregator.
All existing NFT aggregators do not currently charge any extra fee, and neither will we. We have the potential to acquire the majority of NFT aggregator users. Certain types of monetization can begin once a large user base is captured. Moreover, we could charge fees for certain advanced orders, such as orders that need to swap tokens first.

But who is this guy with this weird name asking for our money and attention?
Some of you know me from trolling the MC chats, others might know me from being allegedly “the only Dutch looking guy” at the Merit Circle event. My name is Douwe and I am a developer from the Netherlands. I have been using basic HTML, CSS, and Javascript since I was 12 and making advanced decentralized applications since 2017. The past 3+ years I’ve been doing freelance developer work in the crypto space, which has allowed me to learn a lot of coding languages, frameworks, blockchains, and architectural concepts.

MC help in equity fundraise
I will need help from Merit Circle to close an equity funding round. This would include help with legals, finances, branding, and planning.


Should the DAO develop a NFT aggregator with Douwe and take a 50% equity stake for a $50,000 budget?

  1. The acceptance of this proposal grants the Merit Circle DAO 50% ownership in the to-be created equity of the proposed project. The remaining 50% will be owned by Douwe.
  2. In the event that a token is created, it should give Merit Circle DAO a pro-rata amount of tokens. Proportional to the amount of team tokens the team equity would get in such an event.
  3. Merit Circle will help with bootstrapping. This includes legals, branding, planning and fundraising. This is what the 50K budget is used for.
  4. After the bootstrap phase, Merit Circle DAO will remain a founding partner, but the aggregator team will be led by an independent team. The seed raise funds can be used by Douwe to comprise a team.
  5. Equity for additional valuable team members will be created during the fundraise. The size and allocation will be negotiated with the existing equity holders (MC DAO and Douwe) and investors.


Copyright and related rights waived via Creative Commons CC0 7


Greetings, and thank you for the new proposal

This is Admiral Erik von Pumpson of the MC Enterprise. We finally took off after installing our weapon systems and we’re heading towards the south-western quadrant of the galaxy. We’re striving to reach our destination by 20 solar cycles.

You have the support of the Ascending Galactic Federation with a “YES”.


Erik von Pumpson
Admiral of the MC Enterprise
Ascending Galactic Federation


The number of eyes that this will bring to Sphere from the NFT community, and in turn to MC, are worth the relatively small cost. Having seen myself and friends heavily use Gem and Genie for the past few months, this is an easy YES from me.


Thanks for your new proposal.

Couldn’t this be done as a feature directly within Sphere? You join the Sphere Team, start building there. They will require fast and scalable servers too, possible income will go 100% to MC DAO.

I think there are significant mutual benefits for both parties.


Totally agree with Sub’s comment.
Would be better for MC dao and the holders of MC if this aggregator is integrated in Sphere.

Regarding the equity fundraise, i dont know how big this seed round will be, but it would be nice if this fundraiser is within the community of MC, because the fund used (50K) comes from MC itself.

Furthermore, i think this is a great idea!

1 Like

Thanks for your reply.

Aggregation can be integrated directly in Sphere. MC would get access to the code to integrate it in the marketplace for batch buying and using different payment tokens.

I think the aggregator should be an entity of its own. An aggregator and a marketplace are 2 completely different things. Sphere will be used to sell primarily NFTs that are related to games, but the aggregator will list any NFT from any marketplace. An aggregator that has Sphere natively integrated would benefit the volume to the marketplace, but the marketplace listing marketplaces and collections that don’t have anything to do with gaming wouldn’t be beneficial in my opinion.

I think both Sphere and the aggregator have a big potential as separate platforms. Merging them into one wouldn’t do justice to the aggregator and create clutter for Sphere.



I like having an aggregator on the market. More competition is always good!

I do have some questions, while inclined to say yes.

50k for startup phase, initial marketing probably also legals and seeking extra funding. I get this. And then, Merit Circle (Ltd ?) gets 50% of stonks.

While it’s an aggregator, won’t this just be another Opensea? Opensea now is NFT marketplace + Gem, I think. Would this not compete with Sphere?

How does this translate to value for the MC token or the MC DAO? As two others have mentioned.

Also, do you have team members in mind? Is this the MC team? New team members? How do you pick them? Do you have leads to invest into the equity pre-seed in mind already?

I think everyone wants this, but are just wondering “does this generate value to our MC DAO?”.


Honey Barrel
Vanquisher of non-Frens
The Freefolk Fellowship



While the project might be great I would prefer all investment proposals to go through MIP-2 (investment committee) rather than through direct voting by DAO. I’m happy to be be in Merit Circle DAO because here I have access to professionals who can make investment decisions better than me - so would be stupid not to use their competence.

Also - I agree with @sub that from MC DAO point of view it might be more beneficial to implement it as features inside Sphere. And with @HoneyBarrel - that we should measure will it be more like synergy or like competition for Sphere. So as is - I will vote NO, but simultaneously totally OK if investment committee approves.



I think it’d be nice if the DAO Contributors / Committee would give their thoughts too, and perhaps @SadCatCapital too if possible.

My questions are mainly three-fold:

  1. Do you have what it takes (team recruitment, investor recruitment)?
  2. Competitor vs Integrator & Synergy?
  3. Will it add value to the MC DAO, if so, in what way - e.g. MC token value, cashflows, revenue distro?


Honey Barrel
Vanquisher of non-Frens
The Freefolk Fellowship


1 Like

Great post! Some notes:

Scope is wide

Considering you are currently a one man team and these applications are non trivial to build I would consider limiting the scope.

What have you done before?

To be able to deliver these features you need to grow a team and lead it. Additionally there’s a lot more to just developing when building a business. How do we know you can deliver on all of that?

How does that 50k/50% deal work?

If you raise another round you’ll probably be diluting current equity holders. At what minimum valuation would you raise and how much?

Can a DAO even hold equity?

Being a blockchain native org I don’t really see how that would work.

Have you considered building open source based on a grant?

Although maybe not the most obvious value add for Merit Circle directly but I do think an open source aggregator could add huge value to the wider NFT ecosystem. Market places could build their own adapters, games and users can easily build their own UIs on top and tap into all of the NFT liquidity on a blockchain.

Not to mention it guarantees that something of value is left if you ever decide to move on (which is perfectly understandable)

:heart: Mick


The aggregator will definitely not be a competitor to Sphere, but rather complement it. We won’t be a marketplace, so we also won’t have the fancy game-developer focused features like a customizable and detailed collection pages. There will be synergy, though. Sphere can integrate the smart contracts that have been developed by the aggregator. If we find a new way to save on gas fees, then we will also share this with the MC dev team.

Regarding value for the DAO, I think there are two value-adds here. Firstly, people that go to the aggregator might or might not know Sphere. They might just want to buy an Axie and buy this on Sphere via the aggregator. This means that Sphere generates fees, which will be used to buyback MC. Secondly, the MC DAO has a 50% stake in this aggregator. When the valuation of the aggregator appreciates, so will MC DAO’s stake.

Regarding the (technical) team, I will do the smart contracts and (most of) the frontend code. Later it will likely be necessary to hire another frontend developer. A backend developer will be needed to code the API and order indexers. I do have a couple of smort backend developers from past jobs that I can approach to join the team. Additionally, we’ll need a UI/UX designer. With the $50,000 we can hire someone for a small period of time to join the team and recruit more once we have closed a funding round. For investors I will likely rely more on the Merit Circle team’s connections.



Thanks for the answers! I think I begin to see the value. The aggregator will find the cheapest route to a NFT purchase. It looks at Opensea, Looksrare, Sphere. Whoever provides the optimal cost, will be bought (assuming the NFT listings are near equal).

So Electric’s app will provide ‘neutral’ users that buy NFTs a way to tap into Sphere indirectly, creating further volume to Sphere, netting fees which will boost the value of the MC DAO. Also, because of how Sphere works, these fees (2.5%) will market buy MC and rebate half. It’ll scale MC user numbers, expand the community, and so on.

As for the 50% stonk stake question, the MC DAO (or the Ltd. I am unsure) already has some equity deals I believe, so that isn’t an issue. It’ll allow the MC team to have a close bond with the Electric team, and (as Electric mentioned) even create technological benefits.

Seeing as the mentioned stonk stake is common stocks, MC will also have a significant say in its operations.

Voting a hard YES on this.

Honey Barrel
Vanquisher of non-Frens
The Freefolk Fellowship



Thanks for your reply and questions! I’ll do my best to answer them all in detail.

Scope is wide
The scope is very wide indeed, but indicates what I envision for the aggregator. The product will be developed in incremental phases and according to market need, but launching an aggregator for multiple markets is the first priority. We will develop and launch features to complement this, but it won’t stand in the way of the core functionality: aggregating.

What have you done before
I am a developer at heart, which means I have the technological skills and knowledge to deliver. I also know my weaknesses, which would lie in the strategy and marketing of it all. I am however very open to receive feedback and guidance from the Merit Circle team.

Regarding my background. I am self-taught programmer, but did start teaching myself coding when I was 12, so I have been active for a while. I have build web3 integrated frontends and a range of varying backends. I have done this as a freelancer over the past 2 years. The backends that I have developed have been mostly focused on data-indexing from multiple EVM-based blockchains. I’ve built these from the ground-up, first in NodeJS, later in Rust. I know what it takes to build data-intensive applications like the aggregator will be. I’ve also been a senior frontend developer 2 years ago, in which I had to lead a small development team. I quit this job to go into the crypto space.

How does that 50k/50% deal work?
If this proposal is passed, only MC and I will hold equity in the aggregator. In a subsequent fundraise using preferred shares, our voting rights would not dilute. The valuation depends on where we stand once we reach the stage of a funding round, but my aim to offer 10% preferred equity at a valuation of $10M minimum.

Can a DAO even hold equity
I believe the DAO already has some equity deals. I think from a legal perspective the equity would be registered to Merit Circle LTD, but perhaps the team can better explain this.

Have you considered building open source based on a grant?
I actually think open-source will take away the edge the aggregator can have on its competitors. If you look at NFT and dex aggregator like Gem and Slingshot.finance, their smart contract is closed-source. Finding new ways to save on gas fees or make your app perform better is great to share with the developer world, but doesn’t add a benefit to the business necessarily.

I do agree that it’s great for other apps to build UI’s and applications that tap into the smart contracts. That would still be possible with SDK’s that don’t reveal the smart contract’s code.

If I ever decide to move on (which I highly doubt), anything that I made will be the aggregator’s property and will be left behind for the DAO and other stakeholders.


Thanks for this proposal - great to see all the various talent within the DAO popping up!

I agree with your points regarding there being opportunities for a new aggregator to enter the market. Albeit that we - as you have pointed out - potentially have a more powerful player in the market now following Opensea’s acquisition of Gem, there should certainly be room for good competition (in particular when taking into account how early we are in the NFT space still). Your post indicates that you have several good ideas with regards to how the product could look like, and I am also sure that the MC team would be a good fit to develop the ideas even further. I also note that several people more tech-savvy than me are backing your qualities, which I consider a good sign.

I do however think it would be beneficial to both parties that a written agreement is entered into, which sets out (i) the scope of the work under the project, (ii) each parties’ respective rights and obligations in connection with development of the project/product, (iii) details relating to the structure of the ownership and governance of the product and the separate entity developing and becoming direct owner of the product, (iv) funding of the entity/project, including provisions covering how additional funding will be handled, should it become necessary, (v) how profits will be shared/distributed between the relevant parties in the future, and (vi) exit provisions covering certain exit scenarios (e.g. if you should wish to move on as you mentioned).

The agreement does not need to be made too complicated, but in the interest of the DAO (as this might be a relationship continuing in the unforeseeable future), I think it makes sense to enter into an (enforceable) agreement which protects the DAO’s rights, including rights to any potential value accrual back to MC (as is also highlighted as an important point by a few).

When voting on this one, I would therefore preferably not have a binary “yes/no” option. I think it would make sense to make the “yes” subject to e.g. the majority of the MC DAO core contributors (or an even more limited group of key people within the DAO) subsequently approving a definitive agreement with the author and other relevant parties (if applicable) regarding the development of the product. As it might be difficult and inefficient for the broader group to settle all the details within this wider forum (including points (i)-(vi) set out above), I think it makes sense to delegate power to the MC DAO core contributors (or other limited group of key people) to bring this one home in a format that is beneficial for the DAO, including which secures the rights of the DAO.

Final remark regarding the question on whether the MC DAO can hold equity/stocks. The short answer is that the DAO as such cannot directly own equity/stocks. Merit Ltd. or another centralised entity (legal person) could on the other hand do it, but the equity would not be held by the DAO. There are however possibly ways to structure this which can work so that the DAO gets the economic upside (a topic which I think can be fine tuned in the mentioned agreement).



Thank you @0xDouwe for this interesting proposal, and for all the comments and questions so far.

We are always looking for new ways to add value to the Merit Circle ecosystem, and building new tools for the community to use is one way of achieving this. As the Sphere marketplace is finally coming to fruition, we believe an NFT aggregator could fit in nicely with Merit Circle’s journey into NFT trading.

We agree that due to how nascent NFT aggregation is, the space is far from being too competitive for another protocol to enter. Sphere is ideal for the NFT trading space for the exact same reason.

In terms of the scope of the project, we believe it to be manageable, if done in phases (as you have already replied to Mick). Even if initially the ‘advanced features’ aren’t available, as long as the aggregator is working as intended across marketplaces, and provides cheaper gas fees than Gem/Genie, then that is already good starting progress.

We believe there to be multiple potential value-adds through this aggregator. The first would simply be more users using Merit Circle ecosystem products. It is difficult to gauge how much knock-on impact this would have across the DAO, but more users is never a bad thing.

Secondly, as the aggregator will incorporate Sphere from the outset, anyone using the aggregator will be viewing NFTs listed on the Sphere marketplace. Agnostic NFT traders often just want to see the cheapest place they can buy something, but might not have heard of Sphere. Also, there is always the chance that Gem or Genie do not incorporate Sphere into their aggregators for some reason. This seems unlikely, but if they do not then Sphere could be at an automatic disadvantage to competitors. If this aggregator succeeds in pulling users and volume away from Gem and Genie, then their actions won’t matter as much.

Thirdly, would be the technological/coding advantages. Douwe already highlighted that Sphere and this aggregator would be sharing a common goal - to improve NFT trading. Even though the protocols are different, it’s highly likely that code/tech improvements that are discovered can benefit both protocols, and would be shared between the teams if so.

We appreciate that Douwe has highlighted he would need help with the marketing. This is where we think the Merit Circle DAO can step in and help. With the reach, and number of partners, that Merit Circle has, we don’t think marketing should be a problem.

We also agree with Honey that holding equity shouldn’t be a problem for Merit Circle, as the company already does hold equity. 50% of the equity in common shares will also give us the necessary voting ability to help govern the direction of the aggregator. As long as further equity raises are completed with preferred shares, and at the appropriate valuation, then we also do not anticipate this being a problem.

As always, our desire is to bring more value to the MC ecosystem, and DAO. We believe this will help both indirectly, and possibly directly in the future.

We will be voting YES to this proposal, and excited to see the ongoing development.

Signed with right paw,

Sad Cat Capital


Hello and thanks for taking the time to write such a thorough proposal, apologies if anything I say is redundant as I haven’t read all the comments yet.

I think this is a good idea, and you seem capable so I would like to support, but do have a couple questions.

  1. How much seed capital would need to be raised beyond the proposed $50k from Merit Circle? I see $50k = 50% equity but I presume Merit Circle would be getting a more favorable valuation than the potential investors that follow.

  2. Considering Sphere’s rebate mechanism, is it possible for this to also be considered at the aggregator level, for example if the same NFT is listed one Sphere and another marketplace and the total cost (list price + gas + trade fee) is equal, can the proposed contracts recognize that in this case Sphere is cheaper because of the rebate?

  3. In terms of capturing market share, my biggest concern is ability to deploy quickly. It’s OK to be second move on the few chains aggregators already exist on, but imo it’s important to beat the competition to deploying on the many other chains with NFT activity.

Being that we would be starting from behind, is it feasible to both catch up to gem as well as surpass them on the developments that they are almost certainly already working on?

I am also a bit concerned about equity as there is no way to accomplish this in a trustless manner. It’s not a dealbreaker because this involves the core contributors but could be seen as an example as to why we should invest in equity with other parties down the road which goes beyond the scope of this DAO.
Tokens can be made in 10 minutes by a capable dev so I don’t see time as a legitimate reason to take the equity route.

Again thank you, and I’m largely in favor of your proposal, and look forward to hearing more about it and the Core Contributors thoughts as well.

Joseph Baggashitcoins Esquire M.D. LLC Inc.


Thanks for your reply and questions Joey!

I explained the seed raise in a bit more detail in a reply above yours. Please, refer to the quote below.

Question number 2 is a brilliant take. A true aggregator should take all data into account when calculating the best deal. This includes additional fees such as marketplace fees and gas fees. Therefore, it is indeed a necessary feature for the aggregator to implement.

I think in the first phases it is important to capture a large market size, which is best achieved by integrating a broad range of marketplaces and chains. It will likely be best to start with an efficient and performant aggregator on Ethereum and expand to more chains soon after.

I think it’s very feasible to catch up with Gem in the sense that we can quickly deploy an aggregator that is user-friendly and performant. We can then expand this aggregator to multiple chains before going ahead with more advanced features such as social features and activity history. In the first phase, Gem would then still have the advantage of having more advanced features, but we would be more attractive considering our lower gas fees and availability on multiple chains.

Regarding tokens, indeed it’s easy to deploy a token from a technical point of view. Sustainable tokenomics on the other hand take more time to design. A product often quickly becomes worth as much as the token and without proper planning, a token usually become worthless.

I think for the DAO it doesn’t make sense to take many equity deals, but considering this would be a strategic investment/partnership with minimum risk, I think it makes sense in this case.


Ty for your great response!

I’d be happy to help setting milestones and help you integrate sphere (I wrote the smart contracts).
Also willing to help you on other technical fronts.
Pending some more formal agreement I think this should and could be moved to a vote relatively quickly imo.


Hi Douwe,

Thanks a lot for your tech proposal. I favor building something used and needed within the space, even more so since Gem.xyz sold out to Opensea.

I do have a few questions:

  1. Is this going to be an MC in-house project? If not, have you considered a higher equity split in favor of the DAO and instead become a product owner under the MC umbrella. The DAO could provide more funds and resources post-MVP and remove the need for outside funding post $50k.

  2. Have you discussed whether aggregation is on the roadmap for Sphere with the MC team? I thought Sphere planned on being a fully-fledged NFT platform, with the gaming assets angle just being an initial focus for launch. I may be completely wrong here.

  3. Are you confident in achieving cheaper fees and better contracts than Gem / Genie? Have you any working samples or leads in this. Having this nailed would already make this project a success.

  4. Where and when does MC reap the rewards of this platform? I’m assuming this is a play for getting an exit.

  5. Have you built a platform or SaaS from scratch before?

Thanks again for taking the time with your post. I’m largely in favour of voting YES to get the ball rolling.

Best regards,

1 Like

Hey AS,

Thank you for your support and questions, I appreciate it.

  1. Since MC will take a large stake in it, we will work together on this where possible and necessary. The plan is to have a dedicated dev team for the aggregator, but as @Mick has already mentioned some team members are willing to help and are more than welcome to! Their help and input is greatly appreciated, but of course I don’t want to be in the way of their other responsibilities. Regarding outside funding, it greatly decreases the risk for the DAO and benefits it in terms of the valuation of their stake.
  2. I have discussed the aggregator with Mark to a great extend. We both think Sphere could definitely benefit from having an aggregator implemented directly in the marketplace, which is something we set out to achieve. I think certain aggregator features such as the aggregation to other marketplaces might not be something Sphere would want, but that is of course up to the team.
  3. I am extremely confident in this. I have done testing with the smart contracts already and have found thus far that they’re cheaper than Gem. Moreover, I think these contracts can even be made cheaper.
  4. The direct financial rewards for the DAO can come a) From an exit in which she liquidates (part of) her stake. b) Appreciating valuation of her stake. c) Dividends paid over the revenue of the aggregator.
  5. I have. Not as a founder, but as a developer I have built a platform from the ground up that required an advanced backend and frontend:

Thank you for your support and I hope I have answered your questions!