This article delves into the DA AGE naked-eye 3D advertising screen RWA project launched by Hong Kong Yuanyuan Technology Co., Ltd., exploring whether it is a genuine Real World Asset (RWA) project. The article analyzes its revenue model (advertising fees, ATT tokens, etc.) and the attractiveness of its agency mechanism, while evaluating its shortcomings through five RWA standards (real assets, tokenization, legal custody, market liquidity, smart contracts): lack of third-party audits, weak NFT liquidity, and absence of smart contract guarantees.
- Project Background and Model
DA AGE is a naked-eye 3D advertising screen RWA project launched by Hong Kong Yuanyuan Technology Co., Ltd. in June 2023. The project divides a naked-eye 3D large screen into 3000 small screens, each corresponding to an NFT, priced at $260 (approximately 1900 RMB). Based on an exchange rate of 7.3, the total price for one large screen is:
[ 3000 \times 260 \times 7.3 = 5,694,000 , \text{RMB (approximately 5.7 million)} ]
The project issues 3 large screens per phase, with 9 phases issued so far (a total of 27 screens), raising approximately 150 million RMB. However, only 15 screens have been completed, and only 4 are in operation.
This model has sparked heated discussions: Is it an innovative RWA project, or is it a "scam" under the guise of RWA? This article objectively analyzes its model and controversies in the context of the RWA project boom, including information provided by the DA AGE team.
- User Benefits and Attractiveness
Why are users willing to spend $260 to mint an NFT? DA AGE offers the following five sources of revenue:
Advertising revenue sharing: Each small screen can earn 100-200 RMB in advertising fees per month (average 150 RMB). A large screen (3000 small screens) needs to generate 450,000 RMB in monthly advertising revenue (3000 × 150).
Advertising Time Tokens (ATT): 12.6 points are allocated monthly, multiplied by a factor of 5, redeeming 63 ATT (approximately 300 RMB).
Patent fees: Involves patents, requiring payments to the Hong Kong headquarters for the Indonesian market (not specifically disclosed).
Data fees: To be realized after scaling, currently nearly zero.
Platform fees: Same as above, currently no significant income.
Estimating the revenue from 4 operational screens, each NFT earns about $72 per month (approximately 500 RMB), with an annual income of 6000 RMB, totaling about 48,000 RMB over 8 years. Investing 1900 RMB yields 48,000 RMB over 8 years, which seems attractive.
Additionally, DA AGE employs an agency model: minting 50 NFTs allows one to become an agent, enjoying referral rewards and other incentives, further promoting user participation. The expansion from phase 3 to phase 9 in two months reflects its rapid development.
- Is it a Genuine RWA Project?
RWA (Real World Asset) refers to the tokenization of real assets on-chain, enabling circulation and management through blockchain. The following evaluates whether DA AGE is a genuine RWA project based on five standards:
3.1 Association with Real Assets (Asset-Backed)
Compliance: NFTs correspond to the revenue rights of naked-eye 3D advertising screens, with screens generating advertising income distributed to NFT holders, linking to real assets.
Issues:
NFTs only represent revenue rights, not ownership of the screens. After 8 years, the screens will have no relation to users.
Unlike traditional RWAs (existing assets tokenized on-chain), DA AGE finances first, builds later, and then tokenizes. While the business model may be feasible, it raises controversies within the RWA framework.
3.2 Asset Tokenization (Tokenization)
Partially compliant: One screen generates 3000 NFTs, with NFTs serving as tokens for asset digitization.
Issues: The distributed ownership of NFTs and small investments are difficult to achieve. The scale of 3000 NFTs limits widespread participation, and the overall trading activity in the NFT market is low, making it hard to reflect the advantages of tokenization.
3.3 Legal and Custody Mechanisms (Legal & Custody)
Severe deficiencies:
Lack of third-party audits and custody guarantees. The project has not disclosed the construction costs of the large screens (claimed to be 4 million, 30,000-40,000 per square meter), the destination of the 150 million RMB financing, or the auditing agency for monthly advertising income.
In contrast, the Malu Grape RWA introduced Shanghai Pujiang Data Chain and Shanghai Equity Custody Trading Center to ensure compliance and transparency. DA AGE's shortcomings raise doubts about its credibility.
Reference: The Shanghai Equity Custody Trading Center provides custody for Malu Grape through the "Guyu Chain" platform, complying with the "Trial Measures for the Supervision and Administration of Regional Equity Markets."
3.4 Market Liquidity (Market Liquidity)
Insufficient:
NFTs have some on-chain trading capabilities, but the overall liquidity of the NFT market is weak, with insufficient trading activity, making it difficult to achieve widespread market circulation.
The project has not disclosed the trading situation of NFTs in the public market (such as OpenSea), limiting circulation.
3.5 Smart Contract Execution (Smart Contracts)
Severe deficiencies:
Revenue distribution (e.g., monthly advertising fees of 150 RMB, 12.6 points, factor of 5) relies entirely on manual rules, with no automated execution through smart contracts.
Manual rules are subject to change (e.g., the factor dropping from 5 to 1), lacking transparency and credibility, violating the core advantages of smart contracts in RWA.
- Controversies and Risk Analysis
DA AGE's model combines the concepts of RWA and NFTs, showcasing innovation but also raising the following controversies and risks:
Compliance risks:
Hong Kong's regulation of crypto assets and NFTs is tightening, and the project has not disclosed whether it meets the compliance requirements of the Hong Kong Securities and Futures Commission (SFC) or the Monetary Authority (HKMA).
With 150 million RMB in financing and only 4 screens operational, the destination of funds is unclear, potentially facing regulatory scrutiny.
Lack of transparency:
No third-party audit reports, and key data such as advertising income, construction costs, and patent fees have not been disclosed.
The promised returns (48,000 over 8 years) depend on operational stability, but only 4 screens are operational, raising doubts about scalability.
"Pseudo-RWA" doubts:
DA AGE resembles a revenue rights financing model based on NFTs rather than a standard RWA. Traditional RWAs (e.g., Longxin Technology charging piles) achieve asset circulation and smart contract management through tokenization, while DA AGE lacks these core characteristics.
Agency model risks:
The incentive mechanism similar to multi-level distribution may lead to "recruitment" controversies, increasing legal and ethical risks.
X platform dynamics: DA AGE is active on X, announcing RWA pool entry/exit channels and TP (possibly revenue points) collection notifications, involving screens in Hong Kong and Indonesia (e.g., Lan Kwai Fong, K11 Musea). However, these updates do not mention audit or compliance details, only emphasizing revenue distribution, failing to alleviate transparency concerns.
- Conclusion and Investment Recommendations
Summary: The DA AGE naked-eye 3D advertising screen project, while named as RWA, is actually closer to an NFT revenue rights financing model. Its innovative attempts (such as digitizing advertising screen revenue) hold certain value, but due to the lack of third-party audits, weak NFT liquidity, and absence of smart contract guarantees, it significantly differs from standard RWAs (e.g., Longxin Technology). The project's model is attractive, but risks regarding compliance, transparency, and long-term stability are high.
Investment recommendations:
Ordinary investors: Exercise caution in participation until transparency and compliance are improved. It is advisable to monitor whether the project introduces third-party audits, optimizes NFT liquidity, or adopts smart contracts.
Industry observers: DA AGE provides insights into the combination of RWA and NFTs, but one must be wary of "pseudo-RWA" risks at this stage.
Project team recommendations: Publicly disclose audit reports, introduce smart contracts for automated revenue distribution, and connect with compliant custody institutions (such as platforms recognized by the Hong Kong Monetary Authority) to enhance project credibility.
Acknowledgments: Thanks to the DA AGE project leaders and participants for providing valuable information. This article aims for objectivity and fairness, and readers are welcome to discuss in the comments section.
Reference resources:
Longxin Technology charging pile RWA: Bund Conference case, asset token issuance in Hong Kong's regulatory sandbox.
Malu Grape RWA: Shanghai Data Exchange and equity custody platform case.
X platform DA AGE dynamics: https://t.co/dpXs90ek15, https://t.co/UaZD3VJ25n
Welcome to join the community
Welcome to the community WeChat: BQ221858
Welcome to follow Weibo: @QuarkMing202
Welcome to follow Twitter: @xian202766693