As an average user (10 $GNO locked + OG Nft), the gnosispay card is at the moment my main mean of payment: but clearly, if spending limits are implemented on cashback, this will change.
The cashback incentive is what drives my usage beside the decentralized way of the process.
With spending limits (or at least those very low limits), I won’t see enough value in locking $GNO and use the card.
The DAO should treat the cashback system with great care if it doesn’t want to witness users loss.
Also, the proposal is ambiguous in its form:
I am all for the continuation of the cashback program but this update is not satisfying in my opinion.
This is just subsidizing Gnosis Pay, either its good or not. People voting yes want to keep getting cashback, so vote is biased. Scrap it for a month and see whether people are using it for cashback or using it because it’s actually good
Gnosis Pay must be making money, can’t they buy some gno and fund the cashback themselves?
If the cashback limits had been lower from the start, the cashback program could have lasted longer. Limit 5,000€ per week, which is 20,000€ per month, was too much.
Therefore, a change in limits is definitely necessary, but at the same time, I think they should be monthly rather than weekly.
The weekly limit has a significant disadvantage when it is so low that making larger purchases is out of the question, and once it is exhausted, people stop using the card. There is also less chance that someone will stake more GNO to get a higher limit.
I would be great to leave the limits as proposed, but on a monthly basis.
The estimated duration of the cashback programme is also somewhat low when we consider that the current programme with 10,000 GNO lasted almost a year.
And now, with a 50% lower budget of 5,000 GNO, it is estimated to last only 5-8 months, even with significantly reduced limits, which is quite a short time.
But of course, this entire proposal to continue the cashback programme does not guarantee any sustainability. Once again, only 5,000 GNO will be used for cashback, and that’s it.
another suggestion from my side: don’t rely too much on cashback to let ppl stake gno but give some other incentives like higher withdraw limits through atm, or better exchange rates when using the card (maybe even install a fee for payment in foreign currencies that can be reduced or even void if user holds certain amount of gno). This is of course nothing for short term, cause it might scare away users even more as the reduction of cashback, but in long term it could give incentive to hold gno without burning gno. Also, if communicated early in advance, it might let ppl keeping their gno instead of selling it in view of the expected changes.
This, by the way, is not really up to Gnosis Pay. In part due to FATF regulations trying to eliminate the use of cash in general for better traceability, in part due to neither Gnosis Pay nor Visa nor any other intermediary in between failing to get any cut from ATM withdrawals other than the ATM provider.
Basically as a card provider operating in EEA, especially with ties to crypto, you are under stricter scrutiny as well. Like when you try to just integrate into trad rails under not very welcome regulations, you are not allowed to grow substantially.
I have a credit card (not debit) issued in EEA that allows me to get up to €1000 from atm at once and it worked the same in some non EU countries when I was on holiday (although not at every atm)
Your point only take into consideration high spending users.
New users in developping countried like Brazil and Indonesia will be very happy with the current low weekly cashback reward
In order to be suistanable GP needs to find the correct balance between what users actually uses and what they want…
Users tend to be greedy and want more ane more…thr high spending users will be replaced by low income spenders
Better have 10000 users spending 100$ a week than 100users spending 10000$ a week
Problem with discussions like this is most people only see their own personnal tiny interest and have no vision for long term sustainability. The most loud people will want GP to keep funding high spending/high cashback and milking it until its dry
This prop is valid and its part of the work in progress…lets renew the cashback program like its proposed and focus on bringing low income ,low spending users into the GP program…the numbers dont lies
Your point lacks clarity:
What are you calling high spending users? What is the threshold ?
What are the actual numbers exactly of small/medium/high spending users) ?
You can counter excessive cashback milking from high spending users without really impacting the average user.
I am not against limits, I am saying those presented here are too low even for the average spending user.
I don’t think you should reduce the cashback system to the simple matter of considering the prospect of “small” spending users quantity.
You should consider carefully the existing average users/clients.