I think this is a great idea. I’ll support this proposal. The track records speaks for itself. Looking forward to this!
1 Like
We are definitely glad that you see the potential benefits for the Apecoin community and the APE DAO and this will also help us to avoid the problem of slow decision-making and inefficiencies that can plague some DAOs.
Just want to highlight this and agree with Waabam.
These guys are true professionals, and it’s an education for me on the industry every time I hear Yat give a speech or have a call with James at Animoca Ventures. But ultimately, Animoca Ventures has a ton of other dry powder to invest in non-ApeChain focused projects, and I would urge them to do so. However, we need hyper focus on builders that are building on ApeChain, at least in the early days around the mainnet launch.
I’m totally in favor of this proposal if it’s adjusted to only making investments in projects that will have their first launch/integration on ApeChain. Otherwise, I think that the DAO’s resources are better spent in other ways.
2 Likes
I’m generally in favour of supporting projects to support ape utility that is a given that said the nature of a fund is to drive returns (which benefits the DAO in this proposal) which is what Apecoin ventures wants to achieve. The DAO already funds the overall ape ecosystem with grants and other similar proposals by community vote meaning it would just be a duplication of efforts.
Of course the emphasis is ape utility but our view is if we can drive strong results it will have similar outsized benefits to the DAO that will enhance it’s adoption and awareness.
Put another way, would Apecoin venture exposure in 50-80 deals be meaningful publicity and exposure? Would it benefit the DAO if they have reasonable returns? Would the DAO have more influence and impact in the overall ecosystem through such a lens?
We think it would hence our proposal.
2 Likes
Hi @yatsiu,
Thank you for your ideas [and the ApeCoin DAO community for the insightful discussions].
A moderator will reach out to the author to finalize the AIP Draft using the appropriate template.
- Once the AIP Draft is confirmed by the author and meets all DAO-approved guidelines, it will receive an AIP ID number and move forward for Draft Analysis Review.
- @yatsiu please see your messages for the next steps.
Follow this Topic as further updates will be posted here in the comments. In accordance with DAO-approved guidelines, if the author does not respond within 30 days, the proposal will be automatically transferred to the Withdrawn category, and the author can re-submit the idea.
GM Yat,
Love and appreciate the inclusion of Apecoin in this initiative by Animoca. In a time when the Apecoin DAO has become open to revenue and considering sustainability, this makes sense.
A few thoughts/questions to consider:
- It seems this would be managed entirely by Animoca. Is it there an opportunity to involve Apecoin community members or possible even create a Working Group around a VC arm for Apecoin? Is there a bigger play here?
I’d still expect and hope for Animoca’s Big Brains to take the lead but including Apecoin community in the process would be valuable experience for community leaders.
- More opinion than question here, the creation of an ecosystem based around companies funded by Apecoin Ventures could be beneficial to the founders of the 80 companies. How can these entrepreneurs best connect, share ideas and collaborate for their own betterment as well as Apecoin’s?
In the Open Campus Accelerator, the most common feedback was how they benefited from the time with each other. The creation of a 'Founder Think Tank" was an unintended benefit by the group.
- Last thought, I promise, I bet the community would love the inclusion of some Made by Apes businesses. Can a pathway be created for Made by Apes companies to be considered by Apecoin Ventures? Bored Jpegs growing their brand has to be good for Apecoin, right!?
Excellent for Apecoin and a slam dunk proposal, hope all is well.
3 Likes
Interesting concept re: WG on VC. I see this similar to how some companies have departments around Ecosystem Growth (which could be a good idea in and of itself for ApeChain/ApeCoin).
1 Like
I think these are all good points, Yat. I guess my thought is that if the investment mandate of this new fund was explicitly focused on projects that plan on using/integrating into ApeChain, the DAO receives double the benefit.
They receive potentially solid investment returns (although liquidity for those is probably 5-10 years out) plus they receive the intangible benefit of more usage of ApeChain and more utility for ApeCoin. Those intangibles are hard to measure but could certainly outweigh any additional ROI benefits of having a broader investment mandate across all the chains in the industry.
Why not focus ONLY on projects building on/launching on ApeChain?
With Ape being the native gas token of ApeChain → ApeChain success → ApeCoin demand+++
We need to get game developers on ApeChain. We need tools and infra on ApeChain.
We need cool stuff on ApeChain.
The fund should focus just on this imo.
1 Like
That would dramatically lower the amount of potential opportunities, thus harming the odds of this venture being successful.
So? Whats the problem?
As stated above… if not all capital is deployed within 2 years it will just be returned to the DAO.
The goal of the venture venture is as stated by Yat to grow Ape utility, adoption, etc.
Not by having a lot of potential opportunities.
ApeChain will be the main usecase of Ape with it being the native gas token.
ApeChain success → more Ape demand
More ApeChain volume, more users, etc etc. → drives the demand and success of ApeCoin more than anything else.
Why should the fund NOT only focus on Ape and ApeChain only?
What else should it invest in and why?
2 Likes
Because the purpose of a venture fund is to find the best opportunities available and to exploit those opportunities to return maximum value.
I’ll need a very compelling answer to this question to believe that this should be an ApeChain only fund. What will ApeChain do better than zkSync, Abritrum, Optimism, Blast, Base, or Polygon? There’s also lots of smaller L2s that have been popping up everywhere including Mode, Berachain, Starknet, Linea, and Astar.
These chains all have established userbases, serious funding, and growing ecosystems. The L2 market is extraordinarily competitive. It grows more competitive by the day. ApeChain isn’t doing anything novel, there is no unique selling point. The closest you’ll get to that is a statement that Yuga is building Otherside on it. Even though I firmly believe Otherside will be a financial failure for Yuga, it still highlights that the chain has a single point of failure. That’s the reason it exists currently.
If you were personally building a business and injecting millions into it, would you really pick ApeChain? Strictly from an investment point-of-view, diversification is key to success. The DAO continues to focus on being Yuga-centric. We MUST diversify against these niche bets so if Yuga fails, the DAO can both survive and thrive. This AIP is so good because it gives us a real shot at doing that. By centering on only ApeChain related opportunities, we once again narrow the focus to being Yuga-centric, and relying heavily on the Otherside to bring meaningful adoption to ApeChain. Basically every single day for the past 2 years the best thing to do with $APE was to sell it immediately. I think it’s time for a different mindset and approach.
2 Likes
Adding my perspective to @kodama 's point:
In terms of actual investments (not just grants), I personally believe the DAO should be looking at each one through two filters:
-
Does the investment create a positive financial return for the DAO? (because no one wants to see the DAO bled dry)
-
Does the investment encourage the utilization (and by extension, increase price) of $APE
While there are a lot of opportunities that meet either or both of these criteria, I view the successful launch of ApeChain as the clearest use case of this over the next 12 months.
It’s not to say the DAO shouldn’t to continue to fund non-ApeChain related AIPs, but if we can focus the bolus of investment to those building on ApeChain (either directly through individual AIPs or through funds such as this), we give ApeChain the best possibility to achieve the scale necessary to achieve escape velocity and become self-sustaining.
As it relates specifically to this AIP, if allocating 100% of funds to companies building on ApeChain is not what Yat desires, perhaps he could commit to a certain percentage of funds allocated to ApeChain based investments.
1 Like
Your proposal is indeed fascinating.
It prompts me to ponder whether the DAO’s current mandate permits active investment participation. I’ve often wondered why the DAO lacks an investment team or does not retain investment managers’ services.
Is it correct to assume an AIP may be required to alter the Charter to permit investment participation in the first instance? (I invite comment on this assumption).
Could the proposal’s author shed light on the DAO’s stance and investment guidelines?
2 Likes
To my knowledge there is no restriction for the DAO to grant funds to an entity that may use it for investment, the DAO itself is a grants foundation.
3 Likes
The fund emphasis is on driving adoption and utility for apecoin and while apechain success is definitely going to he helpful we don’t think it’s going to be the only parameter.
Our view is that having a returns focused fund with an emphasis on driving Apecoin adoption will factor Apechain in any event and the returns based focus ensures a disciplined approach that benefits Apecoin in all scenarios. A pure ecosystem fund approach may choose to invest in something that benefits the ecosystem but not necessarily bring returns.
An Apechain focused project could be something the DAO could fund directly for example.
1 Like
Very solid answer ser. I agree with everything you said tbh and if the goal for the DAO is to become autonomous and less dependent on Yuga… you are absolutely right. However, I would love to see APECOIN VENTURES I (general fund) and APECOIN VENTURES II (ApeChain only).
Could be 50/50 split or 70/30.
Some additional thoughts and comments… if the fund only invests in ApeChain related projects it might attract great builders. Maybe you need to create the right incentives for great opportunities to arise.
- we are in web3 and there is the art of pumping your own bag
with investing 10m solely in ApeChain related ventures and potentially attracting talent, builders, etc.
you increase your chances of pumping Ape.
And the DAO will be better off with a 100% ApeCoin pump than with a 10x on a 100k ticket if invested in some web3 startup.
And the chances of Ape pumping are higher with an ApeChain only fund than with a general one.
4 Likes
Totally! Generally speaking if 2 options are presented that are equal or near equal in projected value, I’d want to see the ApeChain option picked over the other. I just want to hedge risk along the way when we can. But that’s how I operate in the wild world of crypto, so my bias shows through here too haha. 
1 Like
Hi ApeCoin DAO Community,
The AIP Draft submitted is currently incomplete and feedback has been provided to the author.
Follow this Topic as further updates will be posted here in the comments.
Thank you,
Great to see a proposal that will allow for trading companies and the DAO to benefit from the DAO funds.
I’ve read the rest of the comments, but have one question.
Who would be the investment team and how would they oversee investments and offer advice to incubate the funded projects?
Also what’s the exit strategy for funded businesses?
Thanks
Grains
1 Like