The Future of Subscriptions is Dynamic and Resalable

Traditional subscriptions are dead capital. You pay for a month of Netflix but only watch 10 hours. The unused 90% of your access is non-transferable and burns to zero.

• Creates $100B+ in wasted consumer value annually
• Locks protocols into rigid, churn-prone revenue models
• Prevents secondary markets and price discovery for access

Mint subscription rights as NFTs or SPL tokens. This turns access into a liquid asset that can be traded, fractionalized, or used as collateral, inspired by projects like Superfluid and Ethereum ERC-1155.

• Enables peer-to-peer resale markets (think Ticketmaster for software)
• Allows time-slicing: sell your unused access in 1-hour increments
• Unlocks DeFi composability: stake, lend, or bundle your subscription token

Static monthly fees are inefficient. Real-time oracles adjust access costs based on demand, usage, and network state, similar to Chainlink data feeds or EigenLayer restaking yields.

• Protocols capture true value: price spikes during high demand
• Users pay for proven utility, not just calendar time
• Enables novel models: pay-per-API-call, congestion-based fees

Traditional SaaS locks capital in non-transferable, pre-paid plans. This creates dead capital for users and limits a business's ability to offer flexible, usage-based pricing.

• $100B+ in annual subscription revenue is illiquid.
• Users lose value from unused service time.
• No secondary market exists for subscription rights.

Treats recurring payments as real-time, on-chain value streams that can be started, stopped, or redirected instantly.

• Enables pay-per-second billing models.
• Streams are composable DeFi assets, usable as collateral in protocols like Aave.
• Drastically reduces administrative overhead and payment failure rates.

A gym membership or software license has zero resale value, even if the user no longer needs it. This destroys potential market efficiency and user optionality.

• Creates friction for user onboarding/offboarding.
• Prevents price discovery for in-demand services.
• Limits the addressable market for premium plans.

Protocols like P00ls and Manifold mint subscriptions as NFTs, enabling a native secondary market.

• Users can sell or rent unused subscription time.
• Creators earn royalties on every secondary sale.
• Enables novel gated access models via NFT ownership checks.

Legacy systems cannot dynamically adjust pricing based on real-time demand, usage, or user reputation. This leaves value on the table for providers and creates poor UX.

• No discounts for high-loyalty customers.
• Cannot integrate real-world or on-chain data feeds (e.g., usage, credit score).
• Manual billing adjustments are costly and error-prone.

Smart contract subscriptions can pull data from oracles like Chainlink to adjust terms dynamically.

• Usage-based billing that scales with API calls or compute time.
• Credit-based tiers using on-chain reputation from ARCx or Getaverse.
• Dynamic discounts for loyal customers or high-volume usage.

A subscription NFT is worthless if you can't sell it. Without deep liquidity, the "resalable" promise fails.\n- On-chain order books for niche subscriptions will suffer from >50% bid-ask spreads.\n- AMM pools for subscription rights require $1M+ TVL per major service to be viable, a massive capital coordination problem.

Real-time price feeds for usage-based billing are a centralized point of failure.\n- Manipulating a Chainlink oracle for a cloud compute subscription could allow attackers to steal $10M+ in service credits.\n- ZK-proofs for usage (like RISC Zero) add ~300ms latency and $0.50+ cost per verification, killing micro-transactions.

What happens when Netflix changes its API or a SaaS provider goes bankrupt? On-chain logic breaks.\n- Admin keys for emergency upgrades reintroduce centralization, defeating the trustless premise.\n- Off-chain attestation networks (like EigenLayer AVS) add 7-day slashing delays, making real-time subscription halts impossible.

Paying $5 in gas to approve a $10 monthly subscription is absurd. Layer 2s help but aren't a panacea.\n- Account abstraction (ERC-4337) bundlers add ~15% overhead cost on small transactions.\n- Cross-L2 subscription management (via Connext, LayerZero) fragments liquidity and increases failure rates by ~3x.

A tradable, revenue-generating NFT subscription looks like a security to the SEC.\n- Howey Test failures could lead to entire protocol shutdowns (see SEC vs. LBRY).\n- KYC/AML integration at the smart contract level (via Circle's Verite) adds ~2 seconds to minting and violates privacy norms.

Without a must-have subscription service, this remains a solution in search of a problem.\n- Current use-cases (premium Discord, newsletter access) represent a <$100M TAM.\n- Enterprise SaaS integration requires 5-7 year sales cycles and legal overhaul, not just tech.

Today's SaaS model locks value in non-transferable accounts. A user paying $1200/year for unused software seats has zero resale value. This creates ~$100B+ in trapped capital annually and stifles price discovery.

• Key Benefit 1: Unlock capital by making subscriptions tradable NFTs or SPL tokens.
• Key Benefit 2: Enable secondary markets for enterprise software, cloud credits, and API access.

Fixed monthly fees ignore usage. Protocols like Chainlink and Pyth can feed usage data to smart contracts that adjust fees in real-time.

• Key Benefit 1: Pay-per-use models reduce waste by ~30-70% for variable workloads.
• Key Benefit 2: Automated, transparent billing eliminates disputes and manual invoicing overhead.

Build with ERC-1155 (for bundled services) and account abstraction (for seamless UX). Think UniswapX for intents, but for service procurement.

• Key Benefit 1: Users can bundle Netflix, AWS, and ChatGPT into a single, resellable tokenized package.
• Key Benefit 2: Protocols can automatically upgrade/downgrade plans based on cross-chain activity via LayerZero or Axelar.