I have an idea to leverage my experience in the design, manufacturing and marketing of gaming accessories to create a custom headset intended for use in both gaming, metaverse experiences and general audio/video entertainment. This would be both the development of a product as well as a new brand identity, inspired by BAYC and what it means to be an ape in this new world of crypto gaming and virtual experiences.
I have worked in gaming accessories for over 10 years, have brought to market dozens of products across multiple categories officially licensed by Nintendo, Xbox and Playstation. I now own and operate my own brand of accessories, with my partner who is a co-owner of a factory in Dongguan, China who manufactures those licensed products. This means that everything we make is engineered and built by the same team that has been trained to meet the stringent quality standards of those first-party licensors.
The biggest question for this idea, or any consumer product idea assisted by the DAO, is how does it benefit the DAO and its mission? Perhaps the simplest answer is to make these types of products available for purchase only in $APE. The counter to this however is that it severely limits the customer base to those already holding $APE or at least in the crypto space, that can easily swap.
I’d initially thought that a great model would be one in which these types of products could return investment to the DAO through royalties, not only paying back the loan but delivering an ongoing revenue stream from those products that sell very well. This however is not a current function of the DAO, and may likely introduce complications to its structure and legal responsibilities.
So I introduce this thread with 2 questions:
Is the idea of a new premium headset and brand, developed in its specs to enhance metaverse experiences and rooted by design in the ape ethos, something that the community would back with their purchasing power?
How can the DAO best support consumer product ventures of any type (electronics, toys, collectibles, beverages, clothing, etc.) in ways that meet its core mission?
Thanks Ape fam!
Proposals submitted to the AIP Ideas category can be vague, incomplete ideas. Topics submitted here are not required to be submitted as a formal AIP Draft Template, however, you may still use the template if you wish.
Here are a few from the past few years - patented chargers for Xbox/PS4; a Bluetooth all-purpose headset, Various Nintendo travel and storage accessories; an RGB Switch dock facade with swappable faceplates that’s one of my favorite products I invented. Pretty much everything from PDP that was Nintendo licensed between 2015-2018 was under my management.
As for other headsets, my partner’s factory manufactures for multiple third-party licensed brands, and we’re expanding our own company’s audio line with some unique headsets with features we’re in the process of patenting.
For those who missed it, this discussion started in this thread and has some interesting comments already, as well as some answers. Please review them so as to reduce the repetition of some comments which are sure to come.
Those look interesting. So, you were able to obtain those licenses from the respective IP owners in order to manufacture those devices? Also, where were they sold? And can you please provide sales links or us to review?
These were products designed and manufactured during my time at PDP, which is a leading third-party hardware manufacturer. It is that company who obtained the partnership with these console and IP brands, and my job was to run product development projects to their performance and quality requirements, work through the submissions to get products and packaging approved, and ultimately to our sales team to get to retail.
With my own company, we are not yet licensed by any of those brands, though we are in preliminary talks with Xbox to become a partner, and have an introduction lined up with Sony within the next few weeks.
Here are some Amazon links to some of the products shown above:
Photos look great - keep in mind, you can also minimize the images if you want.
Thinking out loud - Benefits to the AC ecosystem:
Custom ApeCoin colours so when seen on Twitch or YT audience can get jelly and enquire as to the brand
When unboxing the headset, owner can unlock a small bag of ApeCoin with obvs instructions as to how to claim, why, what, etc
Options to customize headphones with NFT pfp either via an upgrade or as bonus for being an ApeCoin holder
Thinking out Loud - Sales/Marketing/Distribution:
Depending on how many units you have in mind, getting these PBAC headsets into the big box stores and the top online sites would mostly be about PR and social content, versus moving product, at least that’s how I see it – what are your thoughts?
Collab with Made by Apes pre-production so that you can make use of that distribution and feedback channel
Lots more to come I’m sure. Look forward to your pitch with details, numbers and financials.
Multiple EQ settings to optimize audio for different forms of entertainment - gaming, music, video, etc.
Finishes and materials which provide tailored comfort while displaying an outward impression of quality.
Include a travel case, nylon braided 3.5mm cable for wired connectivity and USB-C charging cable; all with the same attention to quality and detail.
Premium packaging and unboxing experience.
Anchored by branding and product brand integration that itself raises the perceived value of the headset and any others which may follow.
I have not yet created the AIP or prepared any numbers, as I first wanted to gauge community interest here in an open discussion. I can say confidently however that the development of a product like this will cost in the low 6-figure range, assuming a new design and tooling rather than repurposing anything existing. Our minimum run expectation would be 5K units, which at a randomly-designated landed cost of $50 would run $250K alone. Tooling adds another roughly $60K, plus design, development, sampling, etc. It is not a cheap venture, but if those units were to sell out at an SRP of $199 (or $APE equivalent), the gross sales is close to $1M.
All of this is conversational of course, and only meant to give a rough view of what it would take to make this happen.
I like the idea but I think the amount requested is not worth the value provided to the coin. If I were in you, I would reduce the number of units to be produced because the funding requested is excessive.
Every manufacturer has an MOQ - minimum order quantity that makes developing and building the product viable. Even with ownership of the factory, we must respect the time and effort it takes to build a quality product. We’ll get engineering and dev support at a significant value from this, but the manufacturing is what it is and demands investment. This isn’t unusual for this type of business, and my company invests regularly at this level to bring products to market.
Also the costs should not be considered in a vacuum - yes 300K is a sizable investment, but it is in relation to both the DAOs available fund as well as the potential benefit to the DAO, which is part 2 of my question (and arguably the most important).
Also I’m curious as to what your definition of “value to the coin” is as if price go up is the foremost goal, then the charter should reflect that. As my initial idea was to create revenue channels through royalties for funding these projects, and that creates issues, I’m challenged to see what defines a project that as you say returns value to the coin - although I agree with the goal in part
As the DAO isn’t set up to receive royalties or any revenue. Do you think there is an option for you to separate the royalties you would have given to the DAO into an entity controlled by you. If someone submits an AIP which gets through you can independently offer them alternate funding which would essentially save the DAO funds and return value that way without having legal implications for the apecoin DAO?
you want to have the funds to develop a risk-free business for yourself where all initial expenses are covered by the dao. It would make more sense to ask for a small percentage of the investment and permission to use the trademark. By generation of value I mean everything that produces use of the coin and indirectly, as you said, increases the price of apecoin. From my point of view your initial proposal was better with the recognition of royalties but now the dao does not foresee this possibility, which I hope will change in the future. Please see my words as constructive criticism because I have seen several AIPs fail on snapshot despite providing more value than your proposal and less cost.
Great suggestion. I think that he should setup a wallet and send net revenue there. Then use that wallet to funds supplement other AIPs that pass. It’s what I would do. The community also be able see how much the wallet holds.