Grant request for 110k ZNN - BetFI

Project Name: BetFI: Decentralized Gaming and Finance on Zenon

Description: BetFI is an innovative platform aiming to revolutionize the online gaming and decentralized finance (DeFi) sectors through a unique suite of decentralized applications (dApps) on the Zenon network. Our project involves creating a range of online games (including Roulette, Price Prediction, Fortune Wheel, Lottery, and Sports Betting), a Decentralized Exchange (DEX), and an Earn platform, all 100% on-chain and transparent. This initiative is crucial for Zenon’s success, as it expands its ecosystem by integrating entertainment and finance, attracting a diverse user base, and promoting the use of ZNN tokens. By enabling users to host gaming rooms with their tokens, we introduce a novel way of generating passive income, thereby enhancing token utility and network activity in both the short and long term.

DApp discussion URL:

Team: Our team comprises three co-founders and three employees with diverse backgrounds in blockchain technology, software development, finance, and gaming. With experience in successfully bootstrapping projects and launching innovative products in the Cosmos ecosystem, we possess the skills and resources necessary to execute this ambitious project. Our hands-on experience and commitment make us the ideal candidates to lead this initiative and ensure the effective utilization of Zenon’s funds.

Pitchdeck: BetFI - Pitchdeck.pdf - Google Drive


High-Level Roadmap: The project is divided into five phases, each contributing unique value to the Zenon community.

Phase 1 High-level overview of main tasks:

  • Develop and launch Cosmos to NoM bridge.
  • Open-source bridge development for community use.

Completion of Phase 1 will be measured by:

  • Successful deployment of Cosmos-NoM bridge.
  • Bridge adoption and usage by other projects.

Phase 2 High-level overview of main tasks:

  • Launch first game on Zenon.
  • Develop and deploy DEX.

Completion of Phase 2 will be measured by:

  • Active user engagement in the game.
  • Functional DEX on Zenon.

Phase 3 High-level overview of main tasks:

  • Develop and launch the second game.
  • Develop and launch Earn platform.

Completion of Phase 3 will be measured by:

  • Successful game and platform deployment.
  • User participation and feedback.

Phase 4 High-level overview of main tasks:

  • Launch two additional games on Zenon.

Completion of Phase 4 will be measured by:

  • Increased gaming options.
  • Enhanced user interaction and network activity.

Phase 5 High-level overview of main tasks:

  • Develop and launch the final game.

Completion of Phase 5 will be measured by:

  • Completion of the gaming suite.
  • Overall growth in network engagement.


Total Requested Funding = 110k ZNN Project Duration = 9 months

Budget Calculation: The budget is based on estimated development hours, market research, and resource allocation necessary for each phase. The rate per hour is calculated based on current industry standards and the skillset required for blockchain development. The market price of ZNN is considered at the time of budget formulation. A premium is included for project risks and opportunity costs, ensuring project sustainability and team motivation.

Project and Payment Milestones:

Phase 1 Funding Request: 20% (22k ZNN) Duration: 2 months

Phase 2 Funding Request: 18% (20k ZNN) Duration: 2 months

Phase 3 Funding Request: 18% (20k ZNN) Duration: 2 months

Phase 4 Funding Request: 27% (30k ZNN) Duration: 2 months

Phase 5 Funding Request: 17% (20k ZNN) Duration: 1 month

Other Information

Risks, Assumptions, Known Issues, Dependencies: Key risks include technological challenges, market volatility, and user adoption rates. Contingency plans include flexible development strategies and constant community engagement for feedback. Dependencies include the stability of the Zenon network and cooperation with other blockchain projects for bridge functionality.

Previous Proposals: This is our first proposal submitted to the Zenon community. We are eager to demonstrate our capabilities and contribute to the network’s growth.

Additional graphs, images, and data showcasing project details and expected outcomes will be added as necessary.

I don’t think you will get fund without delivering.
You ask for donations if u need capital to start.

Will you be leveraging the existing bridge GitHub - HyperCore-Team/orchestrator?

Why Cosmos?

Are you expecting to launch on the L1 or L2 / Sidechain? @aliencoder is working on the SideChain. It’s still in beta. It’s unlikely the pillars will agree to run a betting contract on the L1. Mr. Kaine specifically designed the L1 to remain light.

To the community, I will make a separate post about the remaining AZ and it’s value. Given the price today and sell pressure, anyone willing to spend time writing code is really working for equity. We cannot take the price of ZNN x Amount and relate to hours spent. That calculation does not and will not work at these price levels. Anyone willing to work on the network is working for equity in the project.

This does not mean I support the ask, just pointing out how I’m going to “value” contributions.

1 Like

I don’t think this kind of money should to to a bunch of not top notch games + a bridge to an ecosystem we didn’t ask for. The network effect would be low. Why not building on NoM directly? Why not focusing on 1 really good game?

Everytime I saw someone building 74 things at the same time it was a tremendous fail.

We have priorities (protocol, KOLs, etc) and I don’t think this fits.


Hell no

We have a bridge today that is modular. We can expand it to other echo systems. I’m curious about why Cosmos and was this considered in the original proposal?

Right now we need to solve the Dynamic Plasma issue and finish the sidechain (IMO). Any game we approve should be run in the sidechain. I’m pretty sure no one will merge betting code on the L1. So we need to understand where the betting code will run.

I also think having one really good game with maybe a dex is a good first start. Let’s prove this will generate interest before taking the next step.

Out of respect to our new potential contributors, let’s give them specific feedback.

1 Like

Having a modular bridge doesn’t mean we should pay to plug Cosmos in.

true, I just want to make sure if they are thinking bridge, we are using what we have today. I’m not convinced we need a bridge to cosmos. Maybe BNB would bring more users. Not 100% sure. Plus a BNB connection would probably be a lot easier.

Their proposal is too ambitious to make sense, in a way that make it look like a cash grab with a roadmap specifically made so they could lure in newcomers. All the ingredients make it look bad. But I might be wrong so let’s help them reshape.

  • Why not building one very good game rather than several not so good ones?
  • Why not building directly on the NoM or ext-chain rather than plugging a bridge in?
  • Why did you mention a dex?


Can you provide a technical summary of how you will deliver games and a DEX on NoM?


I completely agree with this.

While NoM desperately needs applications to attract new users, I’m unable to support a task this large for a few reasons:

  • Not a critical need for the protocol/network. An application, especially in the gambling sector (which I have a lot of experience in), should be extremely profitable and self sustainable, particularly because the marketing budget to acquire new customers needs to be large. Look at Stake’s (industry leader) marketing budget, it’s ridiculously large because they also have insanely high profit margins. The incentives to build the application should be the future profits it generates, not a grant from A-Z unless for specific infrastructure (i.e. a bridge to cosmos) that would benefit the whole ecosystem and not the application alone.

  • Deliver/prove value first. As 0x pointed out, given market conditions devs building on top of NoM should expect to work for sweat equity and not actual hourly rates for developers. Any calculation using current ZNN price and hourly rates for developers should be heavily discounted or not considered at all. Additionally, a lot of our best assets (i.e. zenonhub explorer, were delivered and supported first and asked for AZ later. Thankfully, the AZ asks were granted to the developer, or are in the process of being granted, and the developer didn’t put in work in vain, but he took the risk. Any developer not taking this risk on the network undermines the work of others.

  • BetFi UI. I believe the UI of the application is poorly designed and not to the standards we hope to maintain n Zenon. It’s not fully responsive and doesn’t really follow industry standards for colors/contrast/shapes. I’m not a designer but I can appreciate good design. BetFi has none of it. Backend could be amazingly rock solid, but UI needs a major overhaul improvement. Again, we’ll be undermining the top tier work of others by accepting such a large AZ ask with this UI.

  • Promises. We don’t work on promises, we are done with promises. AZ got burnt once already. Deliver an actual spec with the mechanics of each games, or better yet, implement an MVP for each game.



“Ah, what a delight it has been to peruse the latest grant proposal you’ve so generously submitted for our contemplation. After giving it the serious consideration it so richly deserves, I find myself in the rather awkward position of having to decline. You see, the proposal is, to put it mildly, hilariously overpriced. It’s almost as if we’re funding a moon landing rather than a mere tech project. And, heavens forbid, should this comedic masterpiece be presented for an AZ grant vote, I would be remiss if I didn’t express my sentiments in the most colorful manner imaginable. To support such a gloriously inflated cash grab would surely be an act of pure, unadulterated desperation. It pains me deeply, but I must draw the line at squandering our precious resources on such a fantastically preposterous venture.”

I can spend my time writing code. Will it be useful? Questionable.

Would be voting no on this proposal as-is.

A bridge and a game are two entirely different beasts.

The bridge would be more lasting infra that I’d be more inclined to vote assuming the submitted team is equipped for the task.

1 Like