[Discussion] Shimmer token units and potential changes

With the end of the Shimmer staking period, the total supply of 1450896407249092 (or 1.45 quadrillion) Shimmer tokens was minted. This supply represents around 60% of the total supply of IOTA (which has around 2.7 quadrillion). With IOTA we have introduced the scientific notation to make it easier for token holders to know how much they held in Ti (TerraIOTA), Gi
(GigaIOTA), Mi (MegaIOTA), etc.

Shimmer token units and notation - should we change it?

Shimmer is an incentivized staging network that gives our ecosystem early access to exciting new protocol features on L1 and L2, while helping to battletest and find potential bugs. The network offers us a testbed to experiment both on application layer, as well as on the native protocol. As part of this, we are also able to deviate from current design decisions made in IOTA to help find more optimal solutions. The very first discussion I would like to raise to the community today is the Shimmer token units and its notation.

The Memecoin Dilemma: With a supply in the quadrillions, the price that is available on exchanges will be in the millions of a cent. At a $10m market cap, 1 Shimmer token will be equal to $0.0000000069. While there are some interesting research papers on how lower exchange prices can lead to more significant price developments (that’s why all the Memecoins do it…), having such low prices introduce significant problems for all user facing applications.

Important things to note:

  • The base unit should always be SMR. We do not want MSMR / mSMR be the unit of exchange.
  • This is primarily a user facing issue. The total supply in the node software will stay the same. It is only a matter of how the wallets, exchanges and dApps display SMR, and the base unit they all use.
  • None of these options will require any token migration or changes by the token holders. It will all be done client side.
  • The below pros / cons are non-exhaustive and my personal opinion. Please share your thoughts below.

Option 1: Scientific notation (just like in IOTA)

Pretty straight forward, similar to IOTA, we would introduce TSMR (Terra Shimmer), GSMR (Giga Shimer), MSMR (Mega Shimmer), KSMR (Kilo Shimmer). In this situation, same as with IOTA where MIOTA is traded on exchanges, we would also have MSMR traded on exchanges.

The smallest possible unit of SMR will be 1 SMR token. This should make it easy for anyone to correctly transfer and accept SMR tokens.

The MSMR token supply would then be 1450896407. You can find an example table with the price at certain market cap levels below.

Market Cap Token Price Token Supply
$10,000,000 $0.0068922908 1450896407
$50,000,000 $0.0344614541 1450896407
$100,000,000 $0.0689229083 1450896407
$250,000,000 $0.1723072707 1450896407
$500,000,000 $0.3446145415 1450896407
$1,000,000,000 $0.6892290829 1450896407

Pros:

  • Units are the same as with IOTA, so people familiar with IOTA have a known system to work with.
  • Price will start relatively low, but should be no problem to display the price easily on user interfaces.

Cons:

  • High chance that MSMR will be listed and traded everywhere. Something which we really don’t want.
  • It’s confusing what the true “SMR” token then is (see problem above, MSMR vs. SMR). We want SMR to be accepted everywhere, but a Million SMR is the base unit. Is it 1 Million SMR tokens, or is it 1 SMR token?

Option 2: Introduce decimals

This option builds on the idea above, but instead of having a Million Shimmer tokens (MSMR) as the base unit, we introduce decimals. While the total supply of Shimmer will stay the same, we would have decimals and make 1 SMR the base unit in all user facing applications.

You can think about this as a reverse stock split. In this example, if you hold 100 000 SMR tokens today, they would become 1 SMR token.

For example: 100.000 Old SMR = 1 SMR token
New total supply: 14508964072,49092
Smallest denomination: 0.00001

Market Cap Token Price Token Supply
$10,000,000 $0.0006892291 14508964072
$50,000,000 $0.0034461454 14508964072
$100,000,000 $0.0068922908 14508964072
$250,000,000 $0.0172307271 14508964072
$500,000,000 $0.0344614541 14508964072
$1,000,000,000 $0.0689229083 14508964072

Pros:

  • SMR would be commonly accepted everywhere (and not MSMR)
  • Reduce the supply so that we don’t have the “memecoin dilemma”
  • Easy to display SMR and its price on all user interfaces (even at low market cap).

Cons:

  • This could be rather complicated to users again, as we now introduce decimals.
  • We are essentially (artificially) reducing the supply.

Option 3: Keep it as is - Very low price, very high supply

The final option is to keep it as is, with a very low price and a very high token supply. 1 SMR will be the lowest unit and the one that will be generally accepted as base unit for Shimmer. This means that exchanges and dApps will need to find a way to properly display the SMR token price in their interface.

Pros:

  • Keeping it simple (for now), as no changes are required. 1 SMR will be the base unit.

Cons:

  • It’ll be a challenge to properly display the SMR price, exchanges may revert to displaying only a Million Shimmers, even though SMR is the base unit
  • Shimmer will be stamped as a memecoin
Market Cap Token Price Token Supply
$10,000,000 $0.0000000069 1450896407249092
$50,000,000 $0.0000000345 1450896407249092
$100,000,000 $0.0000000689 1450896407249092
$250,000,000 $0.0000001723 1450896407249092
$500,000,000 $0.0000003446 1450896407249092
$1,000,000,000 $0.0000006892 1450896407249092

Conclusion

There is a lot to consider here, which is why it’s so important that the community actively gets involved in shaping and designing the future of the Shimmer network. Let me know what you think below!

  • Option 1: MSMR (Million Shimmer)
  • Option 2: SMR, with decimals
  • Option 3: Keep as is, with low price and high supply

0 voters

8 Likes

I love the " Option 2: Introduce decimals".
But can’t we introduce the decimal at: 1450896407,249092 so the resulting table would be:

|Market Cap|Token Price|Token Supply|

|$10,000,000|$0.006892291|1450896407|
|$50,000,000|$0.034461454|1450896407|
|$100,000,000|$0.068922908|1450896407|
|$250,000,000|$0.172307271|1450896407|
|$500,000,000|$0.344614541|1450896407|
|$1,000,000,000|$0.689229083|1450896407|

20 Likes

the first letter of the coin is almost critical to public recognition and identification. people who hear about SMR network , will initially doubt that MSMR belongs to SMR network. preferable if “M” is appended as a suffix rather than prefix, like SMR.M , SMRxM, SMR(M)

12 Likes

Or start with the same way as IOTA currently works and then after shimmer launch change to Option 2. Then we can test how this would work for IOTA mainnet.

2 Likes

I believe we are still very early with SMR ecosystem and option 2 is probably the best way to go, imo.

3 Likes

I think we should keep shimmer and create hell of many pool on decentral ecosystem and don’t swap it on central exchanges until we have stable prizes in our pools and we can lock more liquidity into the shimmer ecosystem to raise the market cap and tvl and then when price is satisfying maybe move it to centralized exchanges …

at the end centralized exchanges are the problem decentral ecosystems are supposed to solve not support their corrupt incentives and elitist narratives !

Lets keep it defi …

and the good thing is if you guys don’t want to do it were all gonna do it and were all gonna make it
defi is future lets whoop some code devs …

greetings from berlin

stereoIII6

3 Likes

In my opinion we should stick with the current mechanism, which is option 1. Why?

Assumption: The base token is the smallest possible amount to send to someone and is used as a means to pay for the the storage deposit.

Reason 1:
As the price grows the average amount of IOTA per address shrinks meaning that what might be best to display to the user now is not necessary the best to display to the user in 5 years time. Adding a decimal is predicting what a good and easy amount would be to display. With the SI prefixes before the base unit, a client is free to choose the best unit to display to the user. This is what exchanges have currently done by showing the exchange rate in MIOTA, it doesn’t mean this is the norm forever, in the future they might need to display this in KIOTA.

Reason 2:
Decimals are inherently harder to understand for a user than whole numbers. If we started showing peoples current IOTA value as a decimal version of GIOTA i.e. 0.001 GIOTA instead of 1MIOTA how confusing would that be. But decimals might work for say 0.9GIOTA instead of 900MIOTA. But ultimately this should be upto the client to decide based on the amount of IOTA somebody stores or is transacting with.

Reason 3:
Shimmer is ultimately a test/staging network for IOTA, therefore as many parameters as possible should be consistent across the networks, so that any tests/evaluation done can be controlled, and compared across network. This also includes people building onto of IOTA and having a consistent app logic would be beneficial. i.e. in Firefly we already have functions to display the balance to the user in the best precision and accuracy. i.e. if someone has 1000Mi it is displayed as 1Gi.

Reason 4:
Adding decimal to artificially create the base for trading will not stop conventions of using SI prefixes before the base unit and we will then have the same problem. Or worse, as people trade in decimals they will come up with there own name for that unit of SMR and it therefore won’t be intuitive to people outside of the ecosystem. i.e. if the price rises and we are always transaction in 0.001 SMR then a convention will arise and a random name like ‘moons’ would be made up for this. Or they use SI units and call it milli SHM (mSHM) which could lead to confusion with MSHM which would still exist.

Reason 5
Again it comes down to choice by the client, in the future we might have an actual symbol for the currency i.e. $ for SHM. If we stick with the normal base unit we can right $100K $100M $100G in the same amount of space. But with decimals we will always need to show a really long number. $0.000001 would be same as $1 in option 2. $0.001 would be the same as $1K in option two etc.

Reason 6:
Maintain consistency for user understanding.

Reason 7:
What is the name for the base token if the protocol name is now used for 10^x multiple of it?

17 Likes

I think we need consistency. Option 1 (MSMR) helps raise awareness of the meaning of “T”, “G”, and the current “M” in fron of IOTA. I’m sure a lot of holders don’t know, but it highlights the tecnical nature of IOTA (IoT).

7 Likes

Thanks for the response - especially giving deeper insights into how the Firefly team look at this! Makes a lot of sense and I agree with all your points.

Just to understand which option you prefer: You would prefer option 2 (basically truncate the supply) and then combine it with option 1 so we still have scientific notations (MSMR, GSMR, TSMR, etc.)?

1 Like

Ahh I meant option 1, the poll results changed the ordering. In either option the scientific notation or natural language to describe large numbers will arise. And I think this is more intuitive to users than really small values and decimals, where the scientific notation is not used on a regular basis.

3 Likes

I just want them named “Shimmies”

3 Likes

This decision sets the tone for all the tokens of the ecosystem I suspect.
What if we changed the name of $Miota to $Iota and gave a new name to the most basic and smallest divison of Iota?

$Pi
$Ti
$Gi
$Iota
$Ki
$Ni (Nano Iota, for example)

Shimmer Version:
$Ps
$Ts
$Gs
$Smr
$Ks
$Ns (Nano Shimmer, for example)

This model falls in line with how Iota is referred to already and may be a simpler system for new community memwbers to understand and an easier model for ICOs to follow.
-D

3 Likes

In a way Option 1 and Option 2 are similar.
Only difference is the naming being different than MIOTAs now.
If option 2: You would really still be trading in MSMRs but the name would be SMR and just like BTC you have the trailing values after the decimals. (which are definitely needed for BTC as not many of us trade whole $45,000 units.

I agree, with the comment about being more concerned with DEX than CEX for this token.

Keeping it same a IOTA in a way is good as there would be consistency which is very important in my opinion. No need to educate the uses as it would be an existing system. Let have SMR as the token but you can mention in the description that 1 SMR is actually 1 million SMR- it will by default become a norm. Let just have SMR in the exchange and leave it.

Anything but MSMR. Just get it done.

3 Likes

I like Option #2. Why force UI across the spectrum to change? Simply not worth it!!!

Personlally I would keep it like it is. But the the majority love to have decimals. I think the higher price would attrct investors.

I would set the decimal to a Mega Shimmer:

For example: 1.000.000 Old SMR = 1 SMR token
New total supply: 1450896407,249092
Smallest denomination: 0.000001

Market Cap Token Price Token Supply
$10,000,000 $0.006892291 1450896407
$50,000,000 $0.034461454 1450896407
$100,000,000 $0.068922908 1450896407
$250,000,000 $0.172307271 1450896407
$500,000,000 $0.344614541 1450896407
$1,000,000,000 $0.689229083 1450896407
3 Likes

it would be better indeed to start one decimal further, so one SMR is not ridiculously low for smaller markercaps

Second this, 1M is also more symbolic / easier to remember than 100k

$Pi
$Ti
$Gi
$Iota
$Ki
$Ni (Nano Iota, for example)

Shimmer Version:
$Ps
$Ts
$Gs
$Smr
$Ks
$Ns (Nano Shimmer, for example)

This really seems like it combines the best features of all the options.

It makes sense semantically. Currently retail users are basically never ever going to need to refer to a single Iota in conversation and human finance discourse.

Plus I love the idea of calling an Ni a Nit for short.

It’s intuitive. Iota becomes like the Meter in the metric system. Very easy to explain. It’s also easy to explain a Nit: “It’s Iota’s version of a Satoshi.” Done.

Intuitive UX is nothing short of priceless in crypto right now.

MIota are already called “Iota” on the CEX’s. Meaning this could be implemented so easily, almost transparently.

Who else thinks “NanoShimmer” is a fun word to say?

My vote is for this as Option 4.

1 Like