"We needed to gamify the process".

This project has gone through a few transitions but it's fundamentals have always and will always remain the same!
Our mission is to create a sustainable and profitable business and to enhance our community through these metrics.

Initially when the idea of the project was set, we were looking at things from an investor perspective. The same I would approach an Investor I approached this project. But we quickly realized that we couldn't work that way without a bunch of regulation and holes we needed to jump over. Being tagged as a security being one of them.

After I spoke with other founders and legal representatives, we clearly understood that being a straightforward model as we were, was going to inevitably cause us some damage down the line. And I want to avoid that at all costs, I came across a few other concepts other than "Passive Income" like tokenization, gamble, staking, enclosed trades, etc etc
‍

Why not those?

1. Tokens: for this project I don't think tokens are a useful nor a necessary asset. And I think it brings in more problems rather than solutions, in this particular scenario.
2. Gamble: even though there's plenty of countries that wouldn't have an issue with this model, USA where I reside is against and has a ton of regulation towards gambling.
   Note: it would've been a backend rigged model where you essentially still earn what you're meant too, but in a superficial way. Didn't really like this idea of being sneaky either.
   
3. Enclosed Trades: essentially is selling back your NFT and I return it. the manual work on this one was insane and I don't like the idea that a person might lose their NFT even if that % is a fraction of a fraction.

So P2E was on the table, and there is many ways we can do this. while other P2E function on tokenomics, and from a pool of operators and players - our model is quite different because we don't pull funds from players, but from our businesses.

Meaning when you sell a crop in the marketplace essentially you're pulling funds from the Treasury Pool. The Crops you receive are dependent on your rarity and thus you earn what you're entitled too. The speed in which this process is handled is still in question, I'm more in favor that this entire process can be done in 24 - 48 hours. But it might be necessary to function more as a game, and have mechanics that truly make the process a "Process" and not a "Drop".

‍
Why this now if there's no regulation set in place yet?

1. The Ripple Case
2. Long-term Planning

Ripple Case
https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2020-338
I don't think I need to go more on this one, as to it's clear when the hammer goes down, shit goes around

‍

Games not investment!

‍
So in essence, we function the same way, the plan is the same, the people are the same - plus an additional few for this process - but the steps in between are different.
When the project was initially planned and budgeted for, we accounted for everything in these sheets (well not everything, like unforeseen events)
The process of creating a well developed game, that's engaging fun and immersive would be amazing to do! and if possible I'd love to be able to do something like this in the future.

We were are a game but also we reward our NFT holders.

But games are not cheap to do, and I must consider the investment of time, resources and money it will take in order to create this piece. I will literate this again, it is possible that in the future we create/ develop a full fledged game where besides rewarding of NFT holders, we have an actual fun and well developed game that people enjoy. As of right now, I don't believe it's possible to head in that direction. Hence we are creating the MVP (minimum viable product) first until further notice.