Ben
Thank you for this reply! As a precursor, I do believe we should test different ways of putting treasury genesis artworks into circulation, and I do implore us to suggest improvements. I would however, strongly recommend that improvements and modifications are done in a subsequent BIP. Here are my responses:
Ben Last genesis period 1/1 sold for 45 eth on the secondary. granted it was an exceptional early one, but still. I think more open price discovery would be good, while still rewarding this collector for their conviction.
I think one major difference is the sold versus unsold argument here, which in my opinion makes the two not suited for comparison.
Ben So would propose a slight modification: The collector may obtain any single Genesis Period 1/1 of their choice at 10eth. After that, the remaining 1/1s (barring the six kept in treasury) are placed on reserve at 10eth to facilitate open price discovery. It would also be beneficial to Botto’s momentum and visibility in the marketplace if it has live auctions in that range.
At that point, the interested collector could bid on any number of the remaining available 1/1s.
This also assumes that, an artwork that initially received no bids at its perceived 'fair' valuation of 10ETH and currently has no expressed interest, will, in a subsequent auction, receive bids over 10ETH. I see this as us repeating past action and expecting different results, with this course of action much to the chagrin of the collector who approached the DAO and expressed their interest in acquiring the multiple artworks held in treasury. So far, no other (prospective) collector has done this. The collector has also clearly expressed not wanting to participate in an auction setting let alone kickstart an auction. I do not believe this to be a slight modification.
For what it's worth, I have nothing against placing a few artworks on reserve at 10ETH, but there is also overlooked 'downside' of relisting Genesis artworks at 10ETH and these continuing to go unsold for long periods of time after listing (bad optics).
Ben Given that Botto has purely done open auctions throughout its history, I don't feel it fair or optimal to do four OTC at once to a single collector. There may be others with a lot of conviction right now as well, and I feel they should get a fair shot at the same works. I do feel that one OTC is a reasonable gesture of appreciation for the exceptional conviction this collector has shown.
Should other collectors have a fair chance of acquiring these three or four artworks selected by the prospective collector? Perhaps! I would argue though, that equal opportunity presented itself both at time of auction and any approach could have been made to the DAO and/or via our existing collectors. Assuming we do part ways with four artworks - existing and new collectors would still have the opportunity to pick up a previously unsold artwork at Botto's original reserve price in the Genesis period.
Nevertheless, I am unsure as to whether this is the most fair way forward. Personally, I would suggest that the interested collector respecting the historical 10ETH reserve set up by the DAO is fair, with that individual showing clear desire to acquire some artworks held in treasury, while the others that may share the same level of conviction have not stuck their neck out and reached out. The former is a real, succinctly presented deadline offer, with the latter dealing in a hypothetical which we can test in other ways.
Ben I do feel that one OTC is a reasonable gesture of appreciation for the exceptional conviction this collector has shown.
While I understand that going back and attempting to OTC only one artwork may seem a gesture of appreciation, it can also be misconstrued as predatory behavior. Quite frankly, I don't know how well received this counteroffer would be, even though I agree with you, it's a reasonable counteroffer.
Ben Another clause I'd consider is something like max four genesis period 1/1s placed on reserve per quarter. Just given the long-term upside of these early works and that they are quite a valuable asset for the treasury. But don't think it's essential and understand if we want to keep things simple here.
I am ok with this, but would again ask it to be parceled into an optimized BIP after this one, irrespective of result.
In sum, the DAO currently holds 27%(!) of all Genesis artworks. We can easily hedge by parting ways with four artworks curated by the prospective collector, then improve this BIP with a subsequent one that experiments with other ways of getting other genesis artworks into circulation via price discovery.
