It’s genuinely thrilling! It’s sparked so many questions in my mind, and I’m excited to see where this leads.
This tool could significantly help ‘bridge the funding gap’ for projects. It also essentially creates a predictive market on who might receive an RPGF allocation.
I think the Foundation is also working hard on that topic. I recall Mark Tyneway discussing ‘Project tokens’ in a podcast last year, see my notes : ). It might be something to consider in light of this new development.
I noticed the focus is on projects that have already received RPGF allocations, rather than new ideas or projects in their infancy. Why is that? Newer projects, especially those in development, often need upfront capital. Offering them a platform to pitch to investors interested in public goods and the ecosystem is an incredible opportunity. It complements grants and even mirrors the now-abandoned Co-Granting experiment (Introducing Optimism Co-Granting).
However, I’m struggling to see the concrete value proposition for well-established projects. With more regular RPGF rounds, these projects might not often need to urgently raise funds between rounds (but I could be wrong).
Also, the collateral implications could be huge and emerging:
- Integrating my proportional claim NFT into DeFi →
- If VCs start using this tool to inject significant amounts, it’s great for public goods and the ecosystem, but what about measures for anticapture?
- This might raise some legal questions for projects too (expected return on investment - security ?).
These are just initial reactions;looking forward to the developpements and to see how the community responds to this