The DAO Needs Revenue


The DAO Needs Revenue




Fuego is an OG Bored Ape Yacht Club member since mint and one of the founding members of Magic City Apes. Also Founder and CEO of Fuego Labs, Co-Founder and CEO of Ape Spirits, and a serial entrepreneur since 2003.


The DAO is hemorrhaging, the price of $APE is struggling, and all these zero-sum AIPs are only draining the treasury. We need to stop the bleeding and start bringing in some revenue to replenish the treasury before it is fully depleted and there is no ApeCoin DAO left.

Every AIP that gets approved in the “Ecosystem Fund Allocation” category just takes $APE out of the treasury and doesn’t give anything back. The $APE is then market dumped which further impacts the price and reduces the value of the funds in the treasury.

We should not allow any AIPs requesting ecosystem funds to go to vote unless they have a clearly defined source of revenue for the DAO, and integrate $APE as a payment method.

If we don’t stop the bleeding right away, the DAO treasury will be depleted in no time.


This AIP brings many benefits to the ApeCoin ecosystem including but not limited to:

  1. The DAO treasury will not be depleted. With revenue coming in, the treasury will never run out of funds.
  2. The amount of $APE in the DAO treasury may increase if the DAO becomes profitable.
  3. The value of the DAO treasury may increase, reducing the amount of $APE disbursed for each expenditure.
  4. The price of $APE will potentially go back up, but most importantly it will stop dumping.
  5. There will be more utility for ApeCoin holders as the AIPs that get approved will create more use cases for $APE.
  6. Eliminate all the zero-sum AIPs that offer little to no benefit to the ecosystem or its members.

This is just what I can think of off the top of my head in the few minutes it took me to write this. I am certain there will be more benefits to the ecosystem that will be discovered during the idea phase and as time goes by after this AIP is implemented.


Revenue: income, especially when of a company or organization and of a substantial nature.

Deplete: use up the supply or resources of.


When an AIP enters the Administrative Review phase, the Special Counsel should “Return For Reconstruction” any AIP that does not offer to bring revenue into the ecosystem.

The AIP draft template should be updated to include a section related to revenue and referring to implementing $APE as a payment method.

Instructions and information on the forum should explain in detail to AIP authors that they need to offer a source of revenue to the DAO in order for their AIP to proceed to voting.


This AIP should begin to be implemented by the Special Counsel immediately after it is approved.

Whoever is in charge of drafting the information on the forum should draft the changes asap.

These new rules should be implemented within 30 days or less after this AIP is approved.


0 $APE. There is no cost to implement this AIP.

I would like to clarify, is it supposed to set a minimum level of profitability? There may be requests that are incommensurable in terms of the amount of funds requested and profitability. You can request the purchase of a helicopter worth $5,700,000 USD with a yield of 2% per annum, or you can open a bakery for $ 5,700 USD with a yield of 2% per annum. I exaggerate, but nevertheless the meaning should be clear


Hey @Fuego

I’ve got some ideas here, would love to dive more into it… tweeted this today

In addition I have created an AIP the establish the ApeCoin DAO’s Development Working Group to champion this cause and appreciate the communities support.


This is fundamentally at odds with the founding principals written here. There is nothing there about gatekeeping the treasury with revenue only AIPs. If that was the case, this would become a DAO VC fund. At that point we’re better off allocating a certain part of the treasury to a separate team and let them run it as a VC fund as some of the AIPs have requested.

I understand the impetus for this, but I think we would be swinging from one end (grants only) to the other end (profit only) with this AIP. There can be a middle ground in setting up the necessary infrastructure to receive funds and letting the voters decide what should be for profit, and what should be a grant.


I think this needs a few caveats for me to vote YES - for example one idea that springs to mind is APEKIN MASCOT - that type of AIP naturally wouldn’t return revenue in its first outing, maybe later on follow ideas could - but just to highlight there should always be provision for those which fall outside. Other than that I fully support that there must be a share of revenues returned to the DAO when applicable, and we should find a solution to favour those ideas that do this.


Agree with some of the sentiment here. It is certainly possible to be a grant DAO whilst simultaneously championing - even prioritising - growth. My personal opinion is that the treasury is currently seen as a dairy cow by most. Folks too consumed by milking the thing to satisfy their own thirst that they disregard the need to replace the herd.

The cow dies at some point… the farm doesn’t have to die with it.

Aside from philanthropic endeavours OR proposals that clearly illustrate ancillary benefit (reach, awareness, education etc) I feel very strongly that proposals should have a mechanism for returning value to the DAO at their core.


This is a good suggestion. We can organize it, isn’t it contrary to the laid down principles of the DAO?


nice idea , good to go with

1 Like

I am for AIPs that bring revenue back to the DAO. I am against only approving AIP’s that bring revenue back to the DAO.


isn’t it contrary to the laid down principles of the DAO?

Not really because that would be a self encompassing AIP that uses a predefined fund and doesn’t restrict other AIPs from going through.

1 Like

nice idea , good to go with

1 Like

I 100% agree with you.

1 Like

this is the smartest aip idea ive heard!
100 agreed with you!

1 Like

For a number of reasons I cannot support this. I think it’s better to think in terms of value provided, as opposed to revenue generated. Something like education provides distinct value, without (necessarily) bringing back revenue. Should we prevent all such AIPs from going to vote as a result?

I agree that many AIPs seek to take without really adding any value back (be it revenue or meaningful value in other ways), but it’s on us to vote those down. Strictly preventing all AIPs that do not generate revenue feels like it may also prevent some incredible potential AIPs from ever going up to vote.


We definitely need to have a balance, some ideas and projects will grow our community from the outside, some from the inside

I agree with @mattborchert

For example Maaria created an AIP to fund EthGlobal hackathons which will never return value to the DAO in the form of revenue but does bring in new talent and innovative ideas that can expand our horizens and community.

A good example is the recent EthGlobal Instanbul event where we saw a very cool concept being built called ApeFit. I came to the DAO via this very same path so I’m definitely an advocate for these initiatives. I saw @codingwithmanny presentation and loved it so reached out, we got chatting and discovered he’s very active in the Developer DAO and has a wealth of experience and expertise, he’s also a very cool cat.

I’d recommend checking out his project idea and seeing for yourselves. Can checkout his Twix post below.


Hi @Fuego ,

The community feedback period for your proposal would be ending in less than 24 hours.

  • If you’re content with the feedback received, your next steps are to finalize your proposal using the AIP Draft Template.

  • A moderator will reach out to the author to finalize the AIP Draft. Upon receipt of the final Draft, we will review and provide instructions on the next steps.

  • Are you ready to proceed to the next phase or do you wish to extend community discussion for another 7 days?

We look forward to hearing from you.


1 Like

I agree with this concept for sure so I voted for this, but I think there should be exceptions so that it is not requirement that every single AIP generates revenue. I think right now the problem is, as your title states, the DAO needs revenue and is basically not seeking it. So I think probably the majority of new AIPs should be profit generating. However, I think there are plenty of legitimate AIPs that do not directly generate revenue and that this would be too limited as it is now

1 Like

Hi 12Gauge, let’s keep this open 7 more days. Thanks.


This topic was automatically closed after 7 days. New replies are no longer allowed.