Airdrop to Opensea users - Web3 discussion and proposal

Web3 is really about users owning the platforms they use. To succeed these days, the models must be changed from Web2 to Web3. Opensea is currently the NFT monopoly and it has its own pricing power by having all users listing there and most liquidity. As a liquidity provider there, understanding what it means to list on Opensea and not somewhere else, I would like to start a discussion regarding a move which could help succeed not just in terms of big technological advances but also in terms of getting market share enough to matter and compete with the monopoly that is OS.

The idea is simple. Airdrop to Opensea users based on activity, similar to the one Looksrare did. This is truly web3. users own the platform they use and they have incentive to list there and trade there, because they own tokens and stake them for rewards. I have no doubt that the only way to break through the OS monopoly is by being truly Web 3.0 platform and not VCs funded one, or not being just a platform rewarding the devs. From day 1, users must be able to share the success of the platform itself.

I’m opening this discussion and hope it attracts comments about this very important topic. I’m ready to discuss all the pros and cons and guide to the real Web 3.0 future that is coming. As a person with 20+ years experience with web, macro trading, algo trading, HFT, NFTs collector, NFTs liquidity providing, I’m here to share my thoughts and help with whatever I can. For the record, I’m holding some XYZ tokens as well as Polymorphs but this doesn’t mean I’m bullish on the XYZ future unless I see progress on the web 3.0 front. For now its just small allocation unless I understand better the team and community behind XYZ and if my allocation, votes and energy will be useful or not.


I was thinking that we should airdrop to people actually using SOS and LOOKS.


I don’t agree, necessarily.

Almost all of LooksRare volume is wash trading. You can see here and scroll to “Users.” It is abysmal.

Same can be said for SOS which really has nothing other than an airdrop which became the basis for its DAO. It effectively has nothing built, really.

So, I suggest we just focus on OpenSea. These other two, while large in market capitalization now, just shows us how easy it is to achieve widespread buzz without even actually being an effective OS competitor.


Good idea to capture the active community but there’s also a huge portion just there to wash trade for $LOOK

I support this proposal. I think it is very important to involve community and will also serve as a marketing tool. Where will the funding for this come from? Are we simply minting new tokens to fund the airdrop?

I’d vote yes for airdrop to OS users. I’ve listed a bunch on LR at same price as OS and not getting any traction so not actually convinced users are there yet. I think OS is still the move to get to users.

I agree with Andre on this –

Also as a long time fan of Universe, I figure our market place is around the corner so I have not been engaging with SOS/LOOKS.


i hope we’re not gonna be printing xyz like Powell

i, too, am on the ‘been waiting on universe’ so did not care to use LR or SOS.

if anything, i’d suggest rewards LR users after the incentives are settled (and we can statistically show wash trading is mostly gone, or at least, at OS levels), but given the short timeline, focusing on OS seems right to me, too.

1 Like

It is definitely worth considering. These airdrop have been shown to absolutely attract high numbers of users. At least in the short term.

How would we see this working in terms of the xyz token? I only have a miniscule amount of tokens, but would larger token holders be willing to potentially dilute their holdings?

Or would we maybe create a new token solely for use with the marketplace and with no DAO rights, and keep the xyz token separate for DAO voting?

I don’t have a particularly good understanding of how it would all work for this project, as looksRare introduced their token on inception vs universe already has one.

Well, I think this is a great idea but we do not have any tokens which we could use to airdrop so many people. We are going to print 13% of our total supply already after the last proposal. I do not really like the idea of printing even more to airdrop people and I’m also afraid that the majority will just dump the tokens…

I have listed on LR all my items and none was sold there… Even with the LOOKS cashback for trading NFTs… The same with Rarible they also have cashback in RARI for trading, but I sold NFTs there just a couple of times…

I think we should focus more on incentivizing people to trade on Universe and showing to people it is better so people really want to trade on Universe and not on Open Sea…

I think that the $LOOKS airdrop didn’t really get people to use their marketplace if I exclude wash trading. And I do not know if the cashback is the way to go… This is a very serious and hard topic… But I’m more in favor to use the juicy cashback to reward people who are really using Universe marketplace than airdropping everyone. If they can have like 2-5% back in $XYZ it is better than airdropping people who will not eventually use Universe.

I would rather invest more money to make our UI very user-friendly and develop tools what people want. Or to marketing so we could educate people about why it’s better to use Universe as the main marketplace. I would be really careful about printing new tokens.

We need people to come and trade on Universe because they really want to trade on Universe not because they got a few bucks in token with high inflation and which we print as we want…


i think it’s a great point about token dilution.

in general, the folks i know who use LOOKS really do love what it standard for - decentralized marketplace that shares rewards with its users.


I like the cashback model. Typed this up before reading your thread, similar point in 4c.

1. $xyz printer go brrr.
a. Don’t like it
b. If a go, $xyz stakers should have multiplier to offset (presumed) heavy dilution and short-term sell pressure.
c. Vesting via vote-lock?
d. Does this throw analysis behind last printing askew?

2. Targets.
a. OpenSea: yes, the focal point.
b. Looks: yes, do not completely ignore positive community sentiment because mercenaries.
c. SOS: no.
d. Gem/Genie: yes, because aggregators and their users are important. Perhaps undervalued in terms of good liquidity bootstrap candidates.
e. Rari/Manifold minters: yes, artists I know are very frustrated with both right now.
f. SOL/Avalanche/Tezos: TBD. If we plan to expand cross-chain, why not dip our toe in now? Too early? What happens if we have another moat to overcome later?

“3. We have some ideas” – Last AMA. What are these ideas?

4. Alternatives:
a. Feeless windows based on vampire usage (e.g., 3 months, 6 months, 1-year)?
b. Gas reimbursement like Balancer: was that successful? Like ‘we pay gas up to x gwei’ for all listing fees and trades through a certain time period.
c. Future payouts based on usage milestones (heavily weighted for trading volume but also considering mints and listings).


The other thing I see as an advantage of LooksRare is that people like money and LR giving to stakers protocol fees. In our case fees will go into the treasury which will not be very attractive for people because they want money for them selfs directly.

What if we could do something like:
1% ETH goes in to the treasury
1% ETH goes as reward to people who stake and participate in DAO

I think this could be more interesting for people.


Hello there folks! This is Andys first time posting to this communities forum. I’m quite active in other projects though! I’m learning more on Universe recently and wanted to chime in.

My thoughts on this are that airdropping straight to OS users will likely:

  • Highly dilute the value per user (making it unappealing to even claim)
  • Reward big NFT flippers
  • Incentivizes recipients to just dump their tokens

So I am personally against a generic drop. However I believe a more structured approach to reward potential users and get them interested in using the Universe marketplace is more ideal. Whether that’s rewarding existing users (retroactive or proactive?), creating incentives for them use the platform (within timeframes & special conditions) there are better ways than a straight airdrop.

I don’t have the answers but want to help stir up ideas and discussions.

What incentives would bring more users to sell & trade on Universe over OpenSea?
Can Universe partner with upcoming drops to encourage users to use our platform for their trades?
Could potential whitelist slots, raffles or other methods be used?

Why should I use Universe now instead of OpenSea?

Looks like some of these ideas were addressed by @RESISTANCE and @marklar. I didn’t catch them before I posted :wink:


the WETH distribution is, by far, the thing I’ve heard the most positive sentiment around LOOKS…

One thing that people loved about the ENS drop was that it evened the playing field for the little guys. So if there were to be an airdrop of some sort it could purely be based on e.g “has a particular wallet both bought and sold an NFT on opensea at some point” and then regardless off the actual volume they get a similar level of airdrop. Maybe have multipliers for first time the criteria was hit maybe, so ppl that traded 2 years ago get a slightly better drop.

But yeah I think the actual tokenomics of whether the xyz token should be diluted for current holders needs to be figured out first


Or if there will be airdrop (I’m not really in favor at this moment) we could airdrop users not based on their volume but their activity. For example 100 tokens per month so the little guys could be rewarded and not only whales. If you were active for 12 months you get 1200 tokens and one trade per month would be needed for example so if you were trading 6 months than you had 3 months break and after that you trade again 3 months you would get 900 tokens… IDK just brainstorming here. :smiley:


All for an airdrop to OS users with the same claim mechanics as the last xyz airdrop. Either it locks up the airdropped supply or heavily redistributes it to loyal hodlers . Win/win for current holders imo


Can we incentivize moving listings from opensea to

With sites like gaining traction our first step even before any airdrop should be to be integrated to them. If we have lower fees than opensea, we should already be cheaper on if we can get listing migrated to universe.

So game plan should be:

  1. Get integration
  2. Incentivize migrating listings from opensea → xyz (create mass migrating tool?)
  3. buys should then default to xyz marketplace since there are lower fees