5fc4e965ac
- Source: inbox/archive/2025-03-28-futardio-proposal-should-sanctum-build-a-sanctum-mobile-app-wonder.md - Domain: internet-finance - Extracted by: headless extraction cron (worker 4) Pentagon-Agent: Rio <HEADLESS>
37 lines
No EOL
2.1 KiB
Markdown
37 lines
No EOL
2.1 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
type: entity
|
|
entity_type: decision_market
|
|
name: "Sanctum: Should Sanctum build a Sanctum Mobile App (Wonder)?"
|
|
domain: internet-finance
|
|
status: failed
|
|
parent_entity: "[[sanctum]]"
|
|
platform: "futardio"
|
|
proposer: "proPaC9tVZEsmgDtNhx15e7nSpoojtPD3H9h4GqSqB2"
|
|
proposal_url: "https://www.futard.io/proposal/2frDGSg1frwBeh3bc6R7XKR2wckyMTt6pGXLGLPgoota"
|
|
proposal_date: 2025-03-28
|
|
resolution_date: 2025-03-31
|
|
category: "strategy"
|
|
summary: "Proposal to build Wonder mobile app for crypto onboarding with yield optimization and social features"
|
|
tracked_by: rio
|
|
created: 2026-03-11
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
# Sanctum: Should Sanctum build a Sanctum Mobile App (Wonder)?
|
|
|
|
## Summary
|
|
Proposal to develop "Wonder," a mobile app focused on onboarding mainstream users to crypto through simplified UX (no seed phrases), yield optimization on assets, gasless transactions, and social features prioritizing profiles over wallet addresses. The app would target users interested in earning/raising capital and participating in aligned projects rather than memecoin trading.
|
|
|
|
## Market Data
|
|
- **Outcome:** Failed
|
|
- **Proposer:** proPaC9tVZEsmgDtNhx15e7nSpoojtPD3H9h4GqSqB2
|
|
- **Resolution:** 2025-03-31 (3 days after proposal)
|
|
|
|
## Significance
|
|
Represents a major strategic pivot for Sanctum from B2B liquid staking infrastructure to consumer-facing mobile application. The proposal explicitly acknowledged this as "the largest product decision ever made by the Sanctum team" and sought governance validation despite not requiring community CLOUD funds. The failure signals community preference for Sanctum to maintain focus on core staking business rather than pursue consumer app distribution.
|
|
|
|
The proposal cited competitive context: Phantom raised at $3B valuation, Jupiter trades at $1.7B market cap, MetaMask generated $320M in swap fees. Sanctum positioned itself as having unique combination of "fun" product design and "competence and safety" (safeguarding >$1B in funds).
|
|
|
|
## Relationship to KB
|
|
- [[sanctum]] - governance decision on strategic direction
|
|
- [[futardio]] - platform for futarchy-governed proposal
|
|
- Related to consumer crypto onboarding and mobile wallet competition themes |