Shapeshift integration to Stakingreward (+Verified provider programme)

[1screamplease]

Shapeshift - DAO Proposal

a) Integrating $FOX (SmartContract address: 0xc770eefad204b5180df6a14ee197d99d808ee52d)
b) Integrating Shapeshift Vault, Wallet
b+) Nominating Shapeshift to the Verified providers program (highly exclusive)

Website

Stakingrewards

Abstract

Stakingrewards is a core data infrastructure provider for investors and institutions interested in staking analytics and research. Stakingrewards has roughly 8m pageviews and over 450k unique users per month who are looking for staking opportunities. In addition to staking, it serves as a decision-making tool for yield opportunities in CeFi and DeFi. The goal of the integration is to increase awareness of Shapeshift yield opportunities and get more exposure for $FOX & its validator ecosystem.

Description

This proposal would accomplish the following:
Successful integration would make Shapeshift data accessible to Stakingrewards’ core data API service used by crypto banks, exchanges and blockchain institutions apart from regular investors. This grants exposure to Earn Vaults and will reflect in improved Staked Value, Engaged balance, Number of unique Stakers metrics.

Proposal

a) $FOX Asset integration - Standard package ($FOX + validator list)
Public Profile
In-Depth FAQ’s
Real-time Metrics & Calculations
Integration Announcement on Twitter
Advanced Reward Calculator
Calculator Widget
Telegram Support
Maintenance & Updates
Validator On-chain Data, maintenance, updates

Price = 25.000€ in USDC
(1st payment installment)

b) Provider integration includes:

Vault integration
Public Profile
In-Depth FAQ’s
Real-time Metrics & Calculations
Integration Announcement
Advanced Reward Calculator
Calculator Widget
Telegram Support
Maintenance & Updates
Profiles for Vaults Displaying On-chain Data
Vault Maintenance & Updates

*VERIFIED PROVIDER PROGRAMME - JUNE -

Upon passing the programme in the batch of June, together with prominent crypto banks and leading staking infrastructure providers, shapeshift will enjoy the exclusivity of:

• A verified badge on Staking Rewards
• Prioritized ranking on Staking Rewards
• Inclusion in the custom section for Verified Providers (filter) on the Staking Providers page
• Highlighted profiles
• Verified Announcement across SR social channels
• License to share the SR verified widget and certificate on the Provider’s website
• Showcase of all supported assets (even those not integrated with SR)
• Customer Reviews on their Staking Rewards profile
• Moderation Access for the Reviews on their Staking Rewards profile
• Dashboard with edit rights, statistics, and reports of their on-chain and SR performance - (to go live in Q3 2022)

SHAPESHIFT RESPONSIBILITIES

• SHAPESHIFT should provide the required information in the questionnaire and accompanying docs issued by SR in a timely and accurate manner (ideally 1-2 weeks)
• SHAPESHIFT should provide the necessary technical documentation, contacts and API endpoints (if not available) that are required to determine and integrate all the relevant metrics
• SHAPESHIFT should add the SR Verified Provider Widget to your official website
• In the case of failure of the verification programme, SHAPESHIFT has a right to challenge and/or reapply for verification within 90 days of the failure date at no cost. No refund is available, even upon failure.

Price = 10.000€ in USDC (2nd payment installment)

User Story

As an avid staker and affluent cryptocurrency investor, I need more resources showing accurate data, APR/APY, minimums, lockup times, engaged balances, and calculator tools in order to properly make a decision on whether to stake my tokens and whom to stake them with. I want to use the Staking Rewards website to discover this data on Shapeshift because they are the industry leading data provider for staking and crypto-growth tools. Staking Rewards is already a brand I trust to deliver this type of data.

Amount Requested:

1st installment:
25.000€ USDC due now

2nd installment:
10.000€ USDC on the 25th of August 2022

[PTT]

Hi, not sure what this post is, but it doesnt really follow our governance process. If you are looking to set a proposal, I would suggest following the governance process we have set up. Or if you are looking to partnership, I’d recommend going to our discord, ( link - ShapeShift ) and requesting to the mod squad to get a partnership channel setup. I do believe that we have discussed this already, @hunt was this the organization we decided that the cost/benefit analysis didnt make sense to pursue around the time that Marketing moved from PeteCoin to Toasty/You?

Thanks.

[Toasty]

This proposal has my/ the Marketing & Growth workstreams support to move forward with the plan/ budget as outlined above. Myself, @hunt & @willy have been in communication with Stakingrewards over the past few months working on a contract/ agreement that makes sense from both parties.

[Toasty]

Hey PTT,
So we have been working with Stakingrewards over the past few months to agree upon a cost/benefit that made more sense for marketing and the DAO. The direction to make this forum post/ proposal has been cleared by marketing & @willy to move into this stage outside of discord/ partner channels.

[PTT]

The last time they were brought up, I had asked a series of questions and got no answer and was responded in a very disrespectful way when asking legit questions, You can refence the conversation here. For FOXes Consideration: StakingRewards.com

Until these questions and more are answered, I will be advocating against this moving forward and voting against it.

[PTT]

Additionally, these were concerns that @hunt brought up himself, and haven’t seen anything to the contrary in regards to this.

For FOXes Consideration: StakingRewards.com

A competitor analysis is vital imo to contributors and holders alike to understand why there is any merit to the high cost proposed. To be completely frank, the cost is 50-75% too high in my opinion according to unique users/ask if 74k/250k are the numbers you truly want me to use in analysis. Even if the number of users were to be sustained (the period of time you’re referencing was a full on bull market) - the actual cost per unique visitor is in excess of .05c is it not? with a .28-1.6%ctr on…

[hunt]

Yep @PTT valid concerns and I needed to jump on here and mention that I fully support this & helped draft the terms with @1screamplease - while toasty also approves of the spend and terms. I believe this traffic source is valid and furthermore will likely positively directly impact rev. #s IMO (or at least give us data to invalidate continuing spend on this media buy). With that being said, the terms do not include a 5 year term any longer nor is there a ‘one time fee’, which further justifies this offer to me.

Thanks for bringing up the previous conversation, but I think I hounded them enough on calls and reviews of this proposal to justify it being a totally new offer (with us getting a verified badge on our listing that you cannot buy as a freebie, which is pretty awesome of them IMO).

[Josh]

I’m hesitant to spend $35k on this. And if that is in euros, it is $37k (not a big difference, but should be noted).

I look forward to an AMA as discussed on the governance call where the community can ask more questions to understand better if the value we would get is worth spending this much.

Thanks

[Marley]

This proposal has come a long way. It sounds like a lot of spend but could provide a good amount of exposure. It’s not that much in scale of enterprise marketing spends. Stakingrewards.com has excellent SEO and a large audience. I use them frequently for market research.
I support the spend.

[0xean]

I am also unsure if this is the right time to make this expenditure and look forward to learning more about the specific expected outcomes

It would also be good to understand why this wouldn’t fall into the existing marketing budget? Is that budget insufficient? We have had 2 different forum posts in the last month asking for additional spending for marketing related items, so some clarity would help on why this is repeatedly occurring.

[willy]

Thanks for this offer @1screamplease! big fan of stakingrewards.com and looking forward to meeting you on the community AMA.

Can you confirm that, as long as we provide the necessary data, StakingRewards will list all of the earn opportunities added to https://app.shapeshift.com/defi/earn ? Would there be any delay in publishing new earn opportunities on StakingRewards once we’ve provided the data?

If yes, and if @0xdef1cafe confirms we can provide this data, this seems like a compelling opportunity that could drive meaningful users and revenues and be worth the investment.

[1screamplease]

Hi Willy

I can confirm that all your vaults will be integrated and continuously included as you add them.
We will have a private TG group chat where both of our developers can make sure that the API integrates every opportunity seamlessly.

The timeline for the integration is usually 3-4 weeks. In terms of delays, I believe there are none if you are available on telegram and keep us in sync.

I’m sharing some info about the Verified provider questionnaire - It would be great if you could assign somebody to fill it out dilligently and with extensive answers. The questions are going to be about:

• Customer-Service
• Compliance
• Accountability
• Liability
• Reliability
• Governance Participation
• Value Added Services
• Security
• MEV Policy

As soon as the $FOX assets gets visibility and the Provider profile gets verified, I have no doubts that your staking metrics will increase substantially. Cheers

[hunt]

I think the comparison you made here is 100% invalid @0xean - that’s like asking engineering why anyone is posting development related bounties, and why they can’t cover any associated/asked costs w/ that budget. Literally the same idea logically to me.

[willy]

awesome, thanks for confirming this @1screamplease. Looking forward to providing extensive answers on these questions Thanks again for joining a community call and answering q’s

@hunt i think the question @0xean asked is fair and am sure he is not the only one wondering this. i also think it’s justifiable to make this a proposal rather than spending from the monthly workstream budget as this is a one-time expense that was not anticipated in the workstream’s budget. whatever the reasoning, i think we can all be more effective if we trust that questions from community members are well-intentioned and respond constructively rather than defensively.

Appreciate the healthy discussion around this and looking forward to the ideation post

[0xean]

I am not sure I understand your response. Bounties that originate from the engineering work stream are absolutely included as part of the engineering budget.

[Josh]

@1screamplease - thanks for your post above. What do you estimate is the amount of time we will need to dedicate from our engineering team for the integration to be successful?