$1.73 billion revenue by 2027 – engineering to create a scope of work to build out the goosie protocol


I appreciate the encouragement of several ShapeShift folks to post this proposal and get feedback from the community. Given yesterday’s discussion of the ShapeShift’s 10 month runway during the FOXEnomics Office Hour does this help alleviate a pressing need?

The market cap of the ShapeShift FOX token stands at $70 million. What if there was a way to create on-going revenue for the DAO so that in five years’ time the Treasury has $1.73 billion to fund new projects? This proposal is for engineering to produce a scope of work, including people and cost to build out the goosie protocol and integrate it into KeepKey and ShapeShift wallets. Once the scope is produced the community can vote whether the build should go ahead and if so, whether it is funded by DAO Treasury or through a bounty provided by the goosie club Goosie Club .


What if there was a wallet that enables you to double your assets without spending another penny? What if coins deposited into the wallet provide instant liquidity at no interest and with no margin call even if the value of your collateral falls?

What would adoption rates look like if these benefits were integrated into the ShapeShift and KeepKey wallets?

The goosie protocol consists of a smart contract that mints and burns asset-backed, gold-pegged money, goosie and a blockchain that records goosie owned.

Scoping the cost to build and integrate the protocol into ShapeShift and KeepKey gives the DAO two options:

Option 1 – the full monty

If the DAO Treasury funds the build of the protocol, places it on GitHub as open source code under the goosie club license Open Source License , and integrates it into the ShapeShift and KeepKey wallet offering it earns 1% of all assets deposited into the protocol, IRRESPECTIVE OF THE WALLET for ever. So even if the assets are deposited in the Binance or Exodus instance of the protocol the DAO still earns 1%.

Example: If the benefits of goosie were able to attract 30% of the current coins into the protocol within 5 years this would generate $4.65 billion in revenue for the DAO.

Option 2 – take the bounty

If the DAO presents its build scope to the goosie club and it is accepted the club provides a bounty for the DAO to build out goosie and integrate it into the ShapeShift and KeepKey wallets. In this case the DAO earns 1% of all assets deposited into the ShapeShift and KeepKey wallets but not from other wallets using the protocol.

Example: If the early integration of goosie into the ShapeShift and KeepKey wallets attracted 10% of the current coin market cap in five years ($155 billion), the DAO would earn $1.55 billion in revenue.

Once engineering produces the build scope the community can vote on which option, if any, to take.


It was a bold move to decentralise ShapeShift yet totally aligned with empowering people to take control of their finances. Goosie has the same motivation – to let people mint their own money in private with no central organisation. It just so happens that goosie’s must-have benefits can secure revenue for ShapeShift to grow.

There is a moment in the fortune of any organisation when it can choose its destiny. Is goosie such a moment for the DAO?


The proposal is for engineering to scope out the work required to build the goosie protocol, place the code for the smart contract and blockchain on GitHub and integrated the protocol into the ShapeShift and KeepKey wallets.

The scope should be in sufficient detail to enable DAO members and the goosie club to assess the feasibility of the undertaking. It should include:

Core team members including relevant coding/project management experience;

People/skill sets that would need to be hired in;

Time frame;


Impact on existing ShapeShift/KeepKey commitments.

The full design details for the protocol can be accessed via this link:


A summary is provided here:

Smart Contract details:

The goosie smart contract performs a number of functions:

Mint goosie as a fix percentage of the all-time high (ATH) value of collateral for a given deposit of a given coin;

Maintain the fix percentage of goosie minted by regular checks for any new ATH of the collateral for a given deposit of a given coin;

Send goosie minted to the goosie blockchain;

Release collateral by burning the value of goosie minted against it;

Each time new goosie are minted, mint an additional 4% of goosie and send to specified addresses on the goosie blockchain as payment to stakeholders.

In order to achieve this functionality the following are required:

Each coin requires a different smart contract.

Each deposit of each coin is treated as a separate record within the smart contract. It has a different ATH to other deposits.

Using an oracle the smart contract calls upon end of day historical price data since last update in order to evaluate whether a new ATH for the deposit has been reached and whether new goosie need to be minted. I.e. the oracle does not simply call for the current price but all end of day values since last update.

The smart contract also calls on the current spot price of gold (via a gold pegged digital coin) in order to calculate the number of goosie to be minted (100 goosie = 1 oz of gold).

Goosie blockchain details:

Goosie require a blockchain where ownership of goosie is recorded. This should be a low fee environment. Men and women are able to hold goosie with their own private keys without using the protocol. The protocol is only required for the minting/burning of goosie.


If the DAO votes to act on either option presented once the build scope has been produced the benefits are:

must have features that drive men and women to ShapeShift and KeepKey;

significant on-going revenue that grows as assets deposited into the protocol grow;

furthers the vision of the Dao of a borderless financial system built on open, decentralized protocols by providing men and women with asset-backed gold-pegged money they mint themselves.

The goosie club benefits by working with those who know their wallet businesses and are aligned with the aims of club.


The scope and potential build stretches Treasury resources during a down market;

The growth and revenue potential of the build deflect from more important work that needs to be done;

Competition; Binance, Exodus or Atomic decide to integrate the protocol into their wallets; remedy: If the DAO chooses Option 1 then it should encourage other wallets to integrate goosie under the goosie club license as doing so increases its own revenue. If the DAO chooses Option 2 then it has a window of opportunity to grow wallets and revenue before other wallets integrate the protocol.

In terms of the build of the protocol itself the following risks have been identified:

Hack – the goosie smart contract is hacked and assets stolen. This destroys confidence in the protocol as a safe place to hold my assets. Remedy: hire the best developers, keep goosie open source, use proven smart contract technologies such as Ethereum and Polygon.

Fees – the smart contract needs to be accessed regularly in order to see if new goosie need to be minted against any price rise in the coin. This can become expensive if the contract is on a high fee platform like Ethereum. Remedy: use a side chain like Polygon that has low fees; develop a non-contract method of checking prices so that the smart contract is only called if new goosie need to be minted.

Passing off – Binance, Exodus, Atomic or other existing wallets decide to deploy their own goosie-look-a-likes. Remedy: the novel and commercially useful features of goosie can only be deployed within the rules of the goosie club where stakeholder revenue is protected. Any attempt to work outside these rules incurs the remedy charges outlined in the notice that accompanies the open source license Open Source License.


for - engineering to produce a build scope for the goosie protocol in order for the community to assess the viability of the two options presented.

against – engineering does not produce a build scope for the goosie protocol.

thanks for posting . i haven’t had the chance to read through your proposal yet, but I went ahead and moved it to the ‘Engineering’ category in the forum.

Please make sure to follow the governance process outlined here: FOX Governance Process

Governance process tl;dr:

1. Incubation - 3 day minimum: Post your idea in the relevant Workstream on the forum to obtain feedback from the community. No specific template is needed.

2. Ideation - 5 day minimum: Once incubation post has been live in the forum for 3 days, post a draft proposal in Proposal Discussion . Proposals must follow this template and include a yes or no poll . Proposals may continue to be refined based on community feedback during this stage.

3. Voting - 3 day minimum, 60 day maximum: After at least 5 days in Ideation, if a draft proposal has more upvotes than downvotes, it can be posted to Boardroom for official vote.

Appreciate you putting together all these details and proposing to us.

After quickly skimming, Goosie sounds interesting, but also sounds like it would require a fully-dedicated team focused on it to be successful. Considering everything else on our roadmap along with our runway, I personally don’t think it makes sense for ShapeShift to prioritize/fund building this.

Hope you can bring Goosie to life without us and that we can consider integrating it into ShapeShift once it’s live and proven out.

Willy, thank you for your comments. Don’t rule out Option 2 where ShapeShift gets paid a significant bounty for the build that extends its runway AND still can earn its $1.73 billion by 2027.

thanks for your meeting request.

Did you have any luck finding devs for your protocol on the pumpdumpcoin forum?


Oxdef1cafe, As you are probably aware I never posted on the pumpdumpcoin forum but with the Polygon Reddit community. Yes, I continue to have discussions with a number of developers.

Hard no from me on this one; this isn’t a DeFi project, it’s literal nonsense. Don’t feed the trolls.

i was trying to be polite cuz i’m a nice guy and appreciated the time and effort has invested in this, but sometimes being nice can cause more harm than good.

i should be transparent that from what i’ve seen from goosieprotocol, it does not make sense or seem like a sustainable defi protocol, certainly not one that could realistically come anywhere close to “attracted 10% of the current coin market cap in five years ($155 billion), the DAO would earn $1.55 billion in revenue” ; don’t want to waste any more of your time , but I think this has close to 0% likelihood of being prioritized by ShapeShift DAO

Thanks for reaching out and good luck!

Perhaps you would like to be specific about why goosie is not a DeFi and way it is nonsense. Please provide your evidence so that others can understand your reasoning and I can clear up any misunderstanding. At the moment your comment is simply slander.

Willy, I suggest the same as I did for MrNerdHair. Please give your evidence. What does not make sense? Why can it not realistically reach my forecast? Lets have a discussion based on facts and evidence. Then we all may learn something. With respect.