I 100% agree with having cheap promos and skins as DEC or voucher sinks!

As for the DEC bonds, I agree with the idea IF land is truly going to be a major DEC sink like I think you are assuming. You are probably right, but I've tried to push back against land requiring large amounts of DEC. I'm very strongly against that. Any added cost to operate land is indirectly taking that value away from the land and the cards that will be used to operate it. I'm not a fan of that just for a burn mechanic. I'd love to see it as a sink to speed up production times, but I think it should be an optional thing.

What I would much rather see is land being utilized to add more gameplay based progression to Splinterlands. The team has admitted they don't have enough of this and have made sure to add it to the upcoming tower defense and GLS games. Land is an opportunity to go back and correct that with Splinterlands. Instead of leveling up your land by burning DEC, I want to see land leveled up by playing the actual game(s).

Now, there are a dozen different ways you can do this, including some cool ways to integrate SPS staking into it. For example, you could earn "land xp" (get a better name) from ranked battles and that gets distributed amongst all of the land you have, and then you can stake SPS to the pieces of land to magnify that xp gain (the more land you have, the more SPS you need staked to be able to get the max xp for every piece of land from a battle).

Anyways, I could ramble on forever about potential ways to add gameplay based progression into land, but the exact details there isn't really the point. IMO we need to shift into becoming more of a game and less of an investment product, and I think concepts like that are how we do it.