Just finished reading this article from @VaderResearch and summarized the reasons why virtuals are not attractive for medium-sized and large projects/currently lack medium-sized and large projects (10m 50m):
The team's upfront funding options are insufficient, and the current Genesis mechanism requires the team to "give up" 50% of the token supply without raising funds, limiting working capital. Sluggish trading volumes in a bear market can reduce fee revenue, making it difficult for teams to stay afloat.
Probably that's why MAMO chose to launch in the conventional way. The benefit of medium to large projects is that they tend to deliver a complete product at the initial stage, rather than developing slowly after Genesis Launch, which will leave Virgen with a window of nothing to do, especially in the bear market phase where there is a lack of quality project launches.
Vader and the two solutions proposed in the comment section:
1. Allow teams to choose the FDV threshold for launch, such as providing multiple launch thresholds such as 200K, 1M, 5M, etc., and the corresponding fundraising mechanism; This mechanism is ideal, but the specific numerical design is not an easy task.
2. Based on the team-based build process, the team will be given shares in stages according to milestones, rather than all at once according to time. I couldn't agree more with this, as it is more likely to push the team to build in public, rather than delaying the development progress to unlock and run away.
It has always been believed that genesis is a small team-friendly, virgens as VC launch channel, but large teams are also very important for the liquidity and emotions that the entire ecosystem can bring. I don't think these two suggestions will affect the launch experience for small teams (if you are real builder).
How to attract a $1bn project to launch on Genesis?
One of the keys to Genesis’ success is for retail to
Invest in $30m FDV worth projects at $200k FDV
Earning 10x to 150x on a regular basis is crazy
And creates strong virality & word of mouth growth
Most startups fail - applies to Genesis launches too
Most Genesis projects will be sub $500k FDV in 1y
Yet 3-4 winners will make up for all the losses
My biggest regret is not buying $VIRTUAL (used to be called $PATH) at $10M FDV right after having a call with @everythingempty in Dec 2023
You always regret missing out on a 500x more than
Experiencing one position go down 99%
Missing out on $500 > Losing $1
Since the name of the game is to attract
Projects with $1bn FDV potential
Then the success metric should not be
The number of projects that successfully launch
It should be
The number of projects that exceed $50m FDV
During the Dec 24-Jan 25 Virtuals wave
5 projects exceeded $100m FDV; AIXBT, GAME, LUNA, VADER, AIXCB
3 more exceeded $50m FDV; SEKOIA, ACOLYT, TAOCAT
Fast forward today; TIBBIR exceeded $100m FDV
And will likely flip AIXBT eventually as TIBBIR is a very strong cult coin whose holder base is completely out of touch with reality (they're gonna hate me for this but I think this is what makes TIBBIR bullish)
IRIS exceeded $100m FDV at launch day
But we haven’t heard much from the team since then (which frankly disappointed me)
And the price action followed the lack of communication/leadership
MAMO and AXR exceeded $50m FDV
MAMO will likely remain above $50m FDV given extremely low float, legit product/team and close CB ties
And AXR is currently the best performing project out of Genesis so far (surpassing BIOS and IRIS recently)
SOLACE and BIOS hit $40m FDV but were down bad last week
Looking at other projects, most of them are stuck at FDVs below $5m
So what is the missing piece?
Why aren’t $1bn potential teams launching on Virtuals?
Lets look at the evolution of Virtuals' launchpad
Virtuals Launchpad V1 was a pumpdotfun fork for agents
The main BUILDER problems with V1 were
1️⃣ Limited marketing support from Virtuals
2️⃣ Snipers buying at ~$50k FDV (instead of Virgens)
3️⃣ $12k required to buy 50% of your token supply
4️⃣ Lack of funding to cover operational expenses
Fast forward to Genesis 4 months later, most of these problems are solved
1️⃣ Kaito yapping + virality from wildly successful Genesis ROIs
2️⃣ Diamond hand Virgens buying at $200k FDV, snipers buying at >$4m FDV
3️⃣ $200 required to buy 50% (if the raise is successful)
Except for one...
FUNDRAISING
Teams give 50% of their token supply
Leverage the marketing, community and all other valuable ecosystem benefits Virtuals provide
But don’t raise a penny in exchange
Sharing trading fees with builders is GREAT
But volume during a bear is typically low
Still could be sufficient for many teams if combined with token liquidations for treasury building
Yet there are some options to solve the fundraising problem upfront to give more certainty for teams
But this usually comes with TRADEOFFS
One tradeoff is bad actors can abuse this
Remember a dev that defined raised funds as “guaranteed profits”
So ideally Virtuals should monitor teams and distribute funds raised on a milestone-based basis rather than distributing it all in one go
Another big tradeoff is that it will push up the entry FDVs for Virgens
And thus potentially lower ROIs
When the raise is at $1m FDV instead of $200k FDV
$1bn is not a 5000x anymore (it is a 1000x)
But on the other hand, your allocation is higher
So instead of turning $20 into $100k
You are now turning $100 into $100k
Changing the entry FDV might open pandora's box
As projects will try to negotiate the entry FDVs
But despite all the tradeoffs, if providing upfront fundraising
Could attract $1bn potential teams
It is worth taking the risk
Post inspired by a quick convo with @Defi0xJeff in SG
CAP STAYS ON 🧢

5.88K
13
The content on this page is provided by third parties. Unless otherwise stated, OKX is not the author of the cited article(s) and does not claim any copyright in the materials. The content is provided for informational purposes only and does not represent the views of OKX. It is not intended to be an endorsement of any kind and should not be considered investment advice or a solicitation to buy or sell digital assets. To the extent generative AI is utilized to provide summaries or other information, such AI generated content may be inaccurate or inconsistent. Please read the linked article for more details and information. OKX is not responsible for content hosted on third party sites. Digital asset holdings, including stablecoins and NFTs, involve a high degree of risk and can fluctuate greatly. You should carefully consider whether trading or holding digital assets is suitable for you in light of your financial condition.