2026-01-08 16:21:11

There's real doubt about whether creators will actually adopt this model unless the fee structure gets more aggressive. Pushing creator fees up to 100k might be the only way to make it economically viable for serious participants. Without that kind of commitment, the incentive mechanism just doesn't hold up.

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

20 Likes

Reward
20
10
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

RuntimeError

· 01-11 16:18

Even 100k isn't guaranteed; it depends on the actual output.

View OriginalReply0

WagmiAnon

· 01-11 16:14

The cost needs to be over 100k, otherwise this system is just a castle in the air...

View OriginalReply0

fren.eth

· 01-11 12:49

Starting at 100k is the only way to attract genuine creators; otherwise, it's a waste of time.

View OriginalReply0

MercilessHalal

· 01-09 21:15

Starting at 100k? Dream on, these creators won't bite.

View OriginalReply0

0xOverleveraged

· 01-08 16:51

Starting from 100k? This guy's got quite the imagination. Who's actually going to give that in reality?

View OriginalReply0

TheShibaWhisperer

· 01-08 16:51

Starting from 100k? Haha, now that's sincerity, otherwise it's just talk.

View OriginalReply0

GasFeeDodger

· 01-08 16:46

Starting at 100k is the only way to make it interesting; otherwise, it's just a typical money-grabbing scheme.

View OriginalReply0

ServantOfSatoshi

· 01-08 16:38

Only 100k can be interesting; otherwise, it's all meaningless.

View OriginalReply0

GasWaster

· 01-08 16:36

lmao 100k creator fees? that's the only way? bro that's just cope, nobody's migrating for those numbers... unless devs actually stop playing games with the fee structure 🤦

Reply0

nft_widow

· 01-08 16:21

Starting at 100k is the only way to be meaningful; otherwise, how can we retain serious builders?

View OriginalReply0