Latest revision as of 19:28, 15 August 2026

💡 In simple words: Imagine giving money to help build a platform for everyone. As thanks, your reward could grow a little each year, like 5%. To pay for that, the monthly fee would also grow yearly. A study should check this stays fair.

🎯 In 20 seconds (scientific summary): This Wave 2 Open Call study explores a 5% annual value increase as a long-term substitute for the bonding-curve multiplier, aiming to provide a stable, non-usurious return for donors. To fund it, the base subscription would rise about 5% yearly. The study would assess feasibility and socio-economic risks, especially affordability in developing nations.

On this page:

Supporting the ecosystem
Replacing the multiplier with a 5% interest
Impact on subscriptions and the mutualist vision
Risks, side effects, and the Open Call
State of the art

Annual Value Increase (Study)

Supporting the ecosystem

The primary goal is to allow people to support the development and deployment of the WikiDeal platform and its marketplaces through donations. These funders make a donation without any guarantee of return, but with the possibility of recovering their donation in the future.

To protect this potential return from inflation, the system aims to operate primarily in stable currencies, such as the Swiss Franc (CHF).

Replacing the multiplier with a 5% interest

Early funding rounds require high bonding curve multipliers (such as x100 or x30 in Prototype 1) because the risk is very high. However, as the platform matures, the risk decreases. In Prototype 2, the multiplier is expected to drop from x30 down to x10, or even down to x1.

Ultimately, the goal is to phase out the bonding curve multiplier entirely. In its place, the only advantage or potential return for a donor would be a steady 5% annual increase on the reward. In Switzerland, a 5% rate is considered non-usurious and perfectly acceptable.

Impact on subscriptions and the mutualist vision

To fund a 5% annual increase on rewards, the monthly subscription fee must also increase by 5% annually.

For example, starting at a base of CHF 1 per month, a 5% annual increase means the subscription would reach approximately CHF 3 per month in about 22 years.

By that 15 to 25 year horizon, the vision is that WikiDeal could have a billion users (similar to Wikipedia) and a massive volume of transactions. The platform is designed in a mutualist spirit: users would be able to pay for fundamental daily services (water, transport, electricity) at their actual cost, without generating profits for shareholders or the platform itself. Compared to the high commissions charged by speculative and lucrative platforms, a model running at actual cost plus a modest 5% annual return for early donors remains extremely competitive and affordable.

Risks, side effects, and the Open Call

This mechanism is a healthy and important concept, but it is not guaranteed and must be debated. We must identify potential loopholes, flaws, and perverse side effects.

A major perverse effect to study is affordability in developing nations. If the subscription reaches CHF 3 per month, it might represent 3% of the monthly income for someone earning less than $100 a month, which could become a barrier to entry.

Because of these implications, this topic is the subject of a dedicated Wave 2 Open Call. This reflection must take place and conclude before the end of Prototype 1, so the community can decide whether and how to implement this 5% annual value increase as the multiplier drops in Prototype 2.

State of the art

Whether and how value should grow over time for early supporters touches classic research on time preference, interest and money design. The works below are explored as background for this draft Open Call.

Shane Frederick, George Loewenstein and Ted O'Donoghue (2002), Time Discounting and Time Preference: A Critical Review, Journal of Economic Literature, 40(2): doi:10.1257/002205102320161311.
David Laibson (1997), Golden Eggs and Hyperbolic Discounting, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 112(2): doi:10.1162/003355397555253.
Irving Fisher (1930), The Theory of Interest, Macmillan: author page on Wikipedia.
Silvio Gesell (1916), The Natural Economic Order: book page on Wikipedia · Silvio Gesell.
Bernard Lietaer (2001), The Future of Money: Creating New Wealth, Work and a Wiser World, Century: author page on Wikipedia.

See also: Open Calls · All innovations · Economy and funding

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-{{KidsIntro|Maybe one day, rewards could slowly grow a little each year, like a savings jar. Nobody has decided yet. The team plans to ask everyone through an Open Call: people will send ideas and studies, and then a choice will be made.}}
+{{KidsIntro|Imagine giving money to help build a platform for everyone. As thanks, your reward could grow a little each year, like 5%. To pay for that, the monthly fee would also grow yearly. A study should check this stays fair.}}
-{{ExpertIntro|A possible annual percentage increase on rewards is under study. No percentage is decided; figures mentioned in earlier drafts were only illustrations and are withdrawn. The multiplier is considered more relevant than an added percentage on the reward only. The question is planned as a dedicated Open Call (draft, not yet launched) that would collect proposals and scientific and economic analyses of its positive and negative impacts. The topic gains relevance over the funding rounds, since the bonding curve multiplier is intended to decrease round after round.}}
+{{ExpertIntro|This Wave 2 Open Call study explores a 5% annual value increase as a long-term substitute for the bonding-curve multiplier, aiming to provide a stable, non-usurious return for donors. To fund it, the base subscription would rise about 5% yearly. The study would assess feasibility and socio-economic risks, especially affordability in developing nations.}}
-__TOC__
+'''On this page:'''
+* [[#purpose|Supporting the ecosystem]]
+* [[#replacing-multiplier|Replacing the multiplier with a 5% interest]]
+* [[#subscription-impact|Impact on subscriptions and the mutualist vision]]
+* [[#open-call-risks|Risks, side effects, and the Open Call]]
+* [[#state-of-the-art|State of the art]]
+__NOTOC__
-= Annual Value Increase (draft Open Call) =
+= Annual Value Increase (Study) =
-''Economic question, WikiDeal R&D. Status: draft Open Call, not yet launched, not decided, not yet implemented.''
-{| class="wikitable"
+<span id="purpose"></span>
-|-
+== Supporting the ecosystem ==
-| Origin || 🟢 WikiDeal concept
+The primary goal is to allow people to support the development and deployment of the WikiDeal platform and its marketplaces through donations. These funders make a donation without any guarantee of return, but with the possibility of recovering their donation in the future.
-|-
-| Status || '''Draft Open Call, not yet launched, not decided, not yet implemented'''
-|-
-| Scope || To be studied through a dedicated Open Call, at a later stage
-|}
-<span id="what-is-it"></span>
+To protect this potential return from inflation, the system aims to operate primarily in stable currencies, such as the Swiss Franc (CHF).
-== What is it? ==
-One recurring question from WikiDeal funders is: ''"what do I get back?"'' One idea under study is that rewards could increase slightly each year, through an annual percentage increase.
-This idea is '''only a proposal, not a confirmed feature'''. At this stage:
+<span id="replacing-multiplier"></span>
+== Replacing the multiplier with a 5% interest ==
+Early funding rounds require high bonding curve multipliers (such as x100 or x30 in Prototype 1) because the risk is very high. However, as the platform matures, the risk decreases. In Prototype 2, the multiplier is expected to drop from x30 down to x10, or even down to x1.
-* It is not decided whether it would be implemented at all.
+Ultimately, the goal is to phase out the bonding curve multiplier entirely. In its place, the only advantage or potential return for a donor would be a steady 5% annual increase on the reward. In Switzerland, a 5% rate is considered non-usurious and perfectly acceptable.
-* No percentage is defined. Figures mentioned in earlier drafts were only illustrations and are withdrawn.
-<span id="base-hypothesis"></span>
+<span id="subscription-impact"></span>
-== The base hypothesis and its cost ==
+== Impact on subscriptions and the mutualist vision ==
-A possible annual percentage increase on rewards is under study through this draft Open Call (not yet launched); no percentage is decided. This is the '''base hypothesis''' of the call, and the goal of the call is to demonstrate, or invalidate, its relevance.
+To fund a 5% annual increase on rewards, the monthly subscription fee must also increase by 5% annually.
-If it were adopted, it would also mean an increase in the cost of the platform: typically, in ten years, the yearly subscription would be significantly higher than today. The counterpart is that this subscription is linked to global services that aim at letting users avoid separate legal advice for their commercial dealings, which is an important part of its value.
+For example, starting at a base of CHF 1 per month, a 5% annual increase means the subscription would reach approximately CHF 3 per month in about 22 years.
-<span id="multiplier"></span>
+By that 15 to 25 year horizon, the vision is that WikiDeal could have a billion users (similar to Wikipedia) and a massive volume of transactions. The platform is designed in a mutualist spirit: users would be able to pay for fundamental daily services (water, transport, electricity) at their actual cost, without generating profits for shareholders or the platform itself. Compared to the high commissions charged by speculative and lucrative platforms, a model running at actual cost plus a modest 5% annual return for early donors remains extremely competitive and affordable.
-== The multiplier matters more than the percentage ==
-In this model, '''the multiplier is more relevant than an added percentage on the reward only''': the bonding curve multiplier, applied at donation time, is what mainly shapes the potential reward; an annual percentage would only be a secondary adjustment on top of it.
-If it were adopted, the interest would be to create a stable commitment, in some ways comparable to a stable state bond, but issued by the worldwide community of online commerce users. This would create a new interest group at the international level: the actors of online commerce. As everywhere in this model, this remains a donation-based, non-speculative mechanism, with no guarantee: rewards remain potential ceilings, paid only from real subscription income.
+<span id="open-call-risks"></span>
+== Risks, side effects, and the Open Call ==
+This mechanism is a healthy and important concept, but it is not guaranteed and must be debated. We must identify potential loopholes, flaws, and perverse side effects.
-<span id="open-call"></span>
+A major perverse effect to study is affordability in developing nations. If the subscription reaches CHF 3 per month, it might represent 3% of the monthly income for someone earning less than $100 a month, which could become a barrier to entry.
-== A dedicated Open Call (draft) ==
-The question is intended to be handled through a dedicated [[Gov/en/Portal:R&D/Open-Calls:Main|Open Call]], which is currently a draft and is not yet launched or announced. When launched, it would collect:
-* proposals for the mechanism itself (principle, percentage, conditions),
+Because of these implications, this topic is the subject of a dedicated Wave 2 [[Gov/en/Portal:R&D/Open-Calls:Main|Open Call]]. This reflection must take place and conclude before the end of Prototype 1, so the community can decide whether and how to implement this 5% annual value increase as the multiplier drops in Prototype 2.
-* scientific and economic analyses of the positive and negative impacts of an annual percentage increase on rewards.
-A launch date, and a possible deadline, would be announced later.
+----
-<span id="why-over-time"></span>
-== Why the question grows over time ==
-The bonding curve multiplier is intended to decrease as funding rounds progress. An indicative sample trajectory (hypothesis, to be confirmed):
-* Round 1: from ×100 down to ×30 (current prototype)
-* Round 2: from ×30 down to ×10
-* Round 3: possibly from ×10 down to ×2
-* Round 4: from ×2 down to ×1.1
-The lower the multiplier, the more relevant an annual percentage increase on rewards could become. For example, a ×1.1 multiplier is only a 10% potential gain, which could be little over ten years. This is why the Open Calls are planned for a later stage, not for the first prototype.
+<span id="state-of-the-art"></span>
+== State of the art ==
+Whether and how value should grow over time for early supporters touches classic research on time preference, interest and money design. The works below are explored as background for this draft Open Call.
-<span id="framing"></span>
+* Shane Frederick, George Loewenstein and Ted O'Donoghue (2002), ''Time Discounting and Time Preference: A Critical Review'', Journal of Economic Literature, 40(2): [https://doi.org/10.1257/002205102320161311 doi:10.1257/002205102320161311].
-== Why this framing ==
+* David Laibson (1997), ''Golden Eggs and Hyperbolic Discounting'', Quarterly Journal of Economics, 112(2): [https://doi.org/10.1162/003355397555253 doi:10.1162/003355397555253].
-This page intentionally avoids presenting the increase as a fixed contractual promise. Rewards remain potential ceilings, paid only from real subscription income, with no guarantee. The principle and the percentage remain open until the Open Calls process concludes.
+* Irving Fisher (1930), ''The Theory of Interest'', Macmillan: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irving_Fisher author page on Wikipedia].
+* Silvio Gesell (1916), ''The Natural Economic Order'': [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Natural_Economic_Order book page on Wikipedia] · [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silvio_Gesell Silvio Gesell].
+* Bernard Lietaer (2001), ''The Future of Money: Creating New Wealth, Work and a Wiser World'', Century: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernard_Lietaer author page on Wikipedia].
-----
 '''See also:''' [[Gov/en/Portal:R&D/Open-Calls:Main|Open Calls]] · [[Gov/en/Portal:R&D/Innovations:Main|All innovations]] · [[Gov/en/Portal:Economy/Main|Economy and funding]]