ShroomDK is Flipside’s API key to its comprehensive blockchain data in the crypto industry, wrapped in an NFT. Users will get access to the data by minting the NFT. This SDK includes the data from various blockchains including Ethereum, Solana, Optimism, Avalanche, Arbitrum, Polygon, Flow, and many, many more. ShroomDK allows the analysts to focus on what they are best at without worrying about managing nodes, complex data pipelines, or petabyte-scale databases.

Flipside does not charge anything for the minting of ShroomDK NFTs and it has been completely free since its launch. A random amount of NFTs will be available to be minted each day. Also, minters will get a referral code that they can share with others who were not able to mint the NFTs. The ShroomDK NFTs will be upgradable in the future through Spores, which will unlock access to powerups, advanced product features, and a whole lot more.

Mushrooms grow at an unstoppable rate and feed the planet. They also decay to support other living organisms. This is where the naming of ShroomDK originates. Flipside aims to grow and feed the crypto ecosystem by supporting both various blockchains and different analysts in the space. It is about extracting insights from the data to derive benefits for all beneficiaries and nurture products by sharing that data with the world.

Every user has been able to mint two NFTs when they were available. After minting, they offered a referral code that they could share with another address to provide them with the possibility of minting a ShroomDK NFT. The share of minters based on the number of NFTs they have minted demonstrated that almost all of the primary minters have shared their referral code with another address. The cumulative number of minted NFTs has indicated that apart from the gradual increase in the number of NFTs, there have been peaks in the number of mints every day around noon since the launch of SKD. This has coincided with the daily release time of free available mints from Flipside.

The hourly analysis of mints has also confirmed that there have been peaks around noon every day. Another point worth mentioning is the higher number of minted NFTs around noon compared to the number of minters which indicates that almost the majority of users minted their two available mints. On the other hand, the number of minters and the number of minted NFTs are equal at other hours of the day which can be an indication of minting using referral codes. It is also possible that some of the initial minters had waited for the mint at lower gas prices. The analysis of average minting fees has also shown that the fees were slightly higher during the peak hours compared to other hours throughout the day.

Interestingly, there have been few ShroomDK sales even though they could be minted freely. The lower number of sellers compared to the number of sold NFTs has demonstrated that some of the minters had sold both of their mints. Although the average price is quite low for these NFTs, considering their mints, the sellers made a good amount of profit by selling the NFTs.

The data for the analysis of ShroomDK were mainly collected from the ez_nft_mints, ez_nft_sales, ez_nft_transfers, fact_transactions, and fact_event_logs tables of the core schema of the ethereum database. The fact_event_logs table of the core schema of the polygon, optimism, and arbitrum databases was also used for the analysis of failed mint transactions.

> The queries could be set to run every 12 or 24 hours in the future to provide an updated overview of the data presented in this dashboard. The dashboard itself is self-explanatory and the provided texts act as supplementary information.

In the early hours of the minting process after the launch, some of the users minted the NFTs on other chains such as Polygon by mistake. As these mints only burn the fees, even though they registered as a successful transaction on the chain, they are considered to be failed mints since no NFTs were generated after the transaction was complete. The majority of failed transactions have been on Polygon with Ethereum just accounting for a couple. By dividing the number of failed mint transactions by the number of successful ones, the failed/success ratio of mints on Ethereum and all networks has been calculated. Overall, the ratio is less than 10% which indicates a huge success rate of mints.

The number of transfers has also been quite insignificant compared to the number of mints. It is logical since users can mint the NFTs freely. It seems that some of the users have sent one of their NFTs to another address since they only need one to access the data.

In conclusion, the analysis of mints, sales, and transfers of ShroomDK NFTs has demonstrated that the majority of users' activity revolves around mint transactions. The possibility of free minting makes the sales and transfers of the NFTs unreasonable, yet there have been instances in both cases. making an early profit, transferring between wallets of a user, or providing a friend early access before the next batch of NFTs is available might be the reasons behind the sales or the transfers of ShroomDK NFTs. Besides the initially failed transactions occurring on other chains besides Ethereum, the majority of mints have been successful with an overall failed to success ratio of less than 10%.

The mints data were collected from the ez_nft_mints table, in addition to the fact_transactions table. The former table only contains the successful transactions while the latter also contains the failed transactions. Since the minting should have been done on Ethereum, mints on other chains have been considered failed mint transactions since they only burn fees. Even PolygonScan registered the type of those transactions as EIP-1559 which is related to the burning of gas fees since the London Upgrade on Ethereum. The sales and transfers data were selected from the ez_nft_sales and ez_nft_transfers tables by only filtering using the contract address of ShroomDK NFT.

ShroomDK Contract Address: 0xdfb57b6e16ddb97aeb8847386989f4dca7202146