Rating Dragonfly and Folius’ $12M investment in Mahjong Meta

In this article we will use ScopeVC to analyze the users of Mahjong Meta’s NFTs and compare these users to those of other similar GameFi projects with comparable financing rounds.

Introduction

Mahjong Meta, a web3 Riichi Mahjong e-sports platform, has announced on August 2nd the closure of a $12 million funding round led by global crypto firm Dragonfly. The investment will boost its product development and web3 gaming ecosystem growth. Other investors included Folius Ventures, Meteorite Labs, and Emoote, among others.

Background

Founded by Brice Vong, the platform aims to revolutionize the gaming industry through decentralization and web3 integration. After a successful beta test, attracting over 15,000 players and 490,000 matches, Mahjong Meta distinguishes itself with web3 ownership economics, AI-driven gameplay, and unique graphics. Players can compete in various matches or use AI-customized pets for automatic battles. The platform derives inspiration from Mahjong, a game cherished by over 600 million players worldwide.

Mahjong Meta has released 2 NFTs, 0xMahjong in May 2023 and 0xTama in Jul 2023.

• 0xMahjong NFT: 0x4d7a34632Da14D5fc4c548D435cAabC444B87839
• 0xTama NFT: 0x7e527e9b8aad8db0e535bcd265267594059bd529

0xMahjong and 0xTama are both prime NFTs that can bring the owners some special rights in Mahjong Meta games including in-game discounts, free items, and potential airdrops in the future.

Methodology

Assessing an early stage project is always a challenge, no matter what industry we are in. For Mahjong Meta we have decided to look into the profile of NFT minters to assess the project value and performance. NFT minters are a good proxy for paying users of the project.

How to investigate such users? Tools such as ScopeVC provide a clear window into a project’s user profile. Following an outlook on how to use ScopeVC’s Report Center to look into the user profile of early-stage projects.

Input the contract addresses or directly paste users’ addresses, and soon the 0xScope team will get back to you with a comprehensive user report.

Following, we’ll look at the report’s conclusions.

‍

User profile of the project

Minters of both Mahjong NFTs look like experienced NFT holders. Here are some common features.

• Rather active on Ethereum and mostly active since 2022
• Most hold valuable tokens like $ETH, but a few also trade meme coins
• Hold a large amount NFT collections but most are non-valuable ones
• Most trade NFTs on ETH and sometimes interact with potential airdrop projects on BSC
• Lack DeFi experience, especially deep interaction with DeFi projects.

Let’s dive into both NFTs and compare Mahjong NFTs’ holder with the holders of other projects’ NFTs.

Who has minted the 0xMahjong NFT?

Let’s first do anti-sybil checking: are there only a few users for hundreds of addresses? Looking at the ScopeVC report, we can see there are 1,001 addresses having minted 1,500 0xMahjong NFTs. Based on the 0xScope address clustering algorithm, 849 (84.82%) entities were found, which is close to the number of real users.

Let’s dive into the minters of 0xMahjong NFT. We check the transaction history and see that most addresses have over 100 historical transactions. This indicates the minters are very active on chain. Most addresses have abundant transaction history on ETH, but around 50% of addresses are only active on ETH.

We also see that some “OG” addresses have been active since 2017. These addresses signal owners’ confidence in this project: these entities are willing to mint this NFT with addresses that have been used for a long time.

How valuable are these users as NFT buyers? 327 addresses hold >50 collections and only 14.39% of addresses do not have any NFTs. There are 16 addresses holding blue chip NFTs indicating they are highly valuable users in the NFT area.

Interestingly enough, the balance of most target addresses is <$100, with only 1.1% of high-value addresses (>= 10,000 USD balance) on ETH. On BSC, the situation is very similar.

What tokens are these addresses holding? After filtering out the addresses below $50, ScopeVC shows us that the most held token on the ETH chain is $ETH, followed by meme coins like $CAW and $PEPE.

Projects on ETH that target users interact with most are OpenSea, Blur.io, and X2Y2, which are highly related to NFT trading. The DeFi labels of these addresses are few, including lending, borrowing, and swapping. The target addresses are mostly active in the NFT area.

Who has minted the 0xTama NFT?

0xTama is the second NFT collection of Mahjong Meta and has a total of 6,000 items. We find that 5,324 addresses minted 6,000 NFTs. Based on 0xScope’s address clustering algorithm, there are 4,157 entities(78.08%) fairly close to the number of real users.

Although the 0xTama minters are 5x those of 0xMahjong minters, the addresses DeFi behavior and the projects that target addresses are interacting with are very similar to each other.

Addresses’ balance, NFT collections held, and blue-chip NFT held reveal how 0xTama minters have fewer assets than 0xMahjong minters.

One more interesting finding is that several 0xTama minters hold the $STG as their largest position.

Valuation of similar projects — Matr1x Fire and Fusionist

Following, we will compare Mahjong Meta with other two Web3 gaming projects that have recently raised funds: Matr1x Fire and Fusionist. Both these projects have also used prime NFTs to attract and retain early adopters.

Matr1x Fire has raised $10M on September 2022. To date, the project has released three NFTs:

• 0x00723c39194f7f449be736da0d1c4ec809dde793(YATC)
• 0x9a27d13a4896baa03843a0728dff6007d665f8ee (Matr1x 2061)
• 0x4ba03e32dce32b5471c9665f81c4b10c1526151f (Matr1xlink)

Let’s compare the last NFT launched by Matr1x Fire, Matr1xlink, and the last one launched by Mahjong Meta, 0xTama. Matr1xlink’s estimated number of actual minting entities based on the 0xscope address clustering algorithm is 376 out of 814 addresses(46.2%). Compared with 0xTama, the addresses of Matr1xlink minters have similar distributions but are more uneven. A larger number of addresses have lower balances, fewer NFT collections, and fewer historical transactions. Meanwhile, relatively more addresses hold blue-chip NFTs. Most similar projects that target addresses have interacted with are nearly the same for Matr1xlink and 0xTama.

Fusionist also raised $6.6M in June 2023 in a round led by Binance Labs and FunPlus. The project launched both these NFTs:

• 0xcbeb9b45ba9fbfbbccc289ee48dadd6fb65ae2a7 Alpha Prestige
• 0xd396e2018b67446b134c30a89166487a8b2abd2e Quartan Primes

Analyzing Quartan Primes we get to very similar results. The estimated number of real users based on the 0xscope address clustering algorithm is 386 out of 549 addresses(70.3%). Quartan Primes seems to have more addresses with <10 historical transactions but also more “OG” addresses. Addresses’ balance and blue-chip NFT holdings show the company’s minters are more valuable than others.

In summary, when compared to projects like Matr1x Fire and Fusionist, Mahjong Meta holds its ground. The number of actual users or entities involved in minting the NFTs offers a window into the project’s traction and potential longevity. While Matr1x Fire’s Matr1xlink showcases a more uneven distribution of minters in terms of assets and experience, Fusionist’s Quartan Primes reveals a community that might be comparatively newer to the crypto sphere but still holds significant value.

Conclusion

Mahjong Meta’s successful funding round and the profile of its NFT minters reflect the project’s robust position in the GameFi landscape. Its unique offering, coupled with the growing interest from seasoned NFT enthusiasts, underscores its potential to further shape the decentralized gaming frontier. The future looks promising for Mahjong Meta, especially as it continues to evolve in response to the dynamic preferences and behaviors of its user base.

Find out more about ScopeVC

Disclaimer

This report is based on sources believed to be reliable, but we cannot guarantee its accuracy or completeness and are not liable for any losses arising from its use. It provides general information only and should not be seen as investment advice; users must make their own investment decisions.

‍