This is just my personal take, but for a startup at least, I think that focusing on quality projects and then later turning on the hype machine for thousands of projects to join would be a better plan
I agree, 100 is too little an amount for 3 years of work bringing in builders to the ecosystem. Honestly, I dare say I expect 100 projects a year a minimum TBH
I think that as a newcomer to the scene, Mantle should be prioritizing quality over quantity right now. When they 100% consolidate their position, maybe then they can shift their focus to acquiring more projects and protocols
100% agree on this take
Would rather the chain be known for a dozen ultra high quality and useful projects than having thousands of low quality and questionable ones.
We focus on quality now, and then move to pushing big numbers later.
IMO I think quality projects coming to the ecosystem bring their already established communities with them, which adds to the activity on Mantle, which makes it more attractive to other quality projects, and then after that lower-tier projects and so on and so forth.
It’s just a snowball effect starting with quality projects.
Can anyone explain what the “capital call” part is about? I couldn’t get quite enough information regarding that
Of course. A ‘capital call’ is the process by which a fund operator (Mirana) asks their fund investors (BitDAO) to contribute their pro rata portion of their fund commitments.
For the Ecofund, capital call is done 10% for the first tranche, and 30% for the next three tranches. What it means is that only 10M would be called from BitDAO initially for investments. Only when the first 10M is used / deployed, the next 30M would be ‘called’.
There’s no such thing as blindly trust since the managers will do the research and diligence necessary for each project, the trust here is about the project(s) they choose for the line-up which will have a chance to receive the needed funding.
Oh okay thank you for your explanation!
I have a follow up question though.
Will this initial capital call (the $10M) be given to Mantle as a lump sum, or based on milestones?
Both obviously have their benefits but I personally think milestones are a better option since this will give more incentive for better yet more efficient performance
Agreed 100%!! We just need a couple of projects to set the wheels in motion and then everything will be downhill from there.
Its exactly why I’m focusing on the fact that Mantle needs to first introduce projects of the highest quality and later focus on improving the number of the projects being built on the chain
The objective here would be to go with a minimum number like 100 but also preserve quality.
We have seen in the past 2 years, ecosystem funds of other projects not do so well due to narrative based investing versus value based investing.
I agree , we can expect more than 100 project for sure !!
Type 4 definitely ,with current conditions would not trust any 3rd parties to handle.
This proposal was constructive and of great significance, and various measures involved in it would greatly promote the development of MANTLE ecology.
I agree, but it would be ideal for Mantle to first present projects of the highest level, and then focus on increasing the number of projects!
High-quality projects entering the ecosystem bring with them their already created-developed communities, which increases the activity and PR of Mantle well, which makes it more attractive for other high-quality projects.It is better to have a network known for dozens of very high-quality and useful projects than to have thousands of low-quality and questionable ones.
Totally agree - the ecosystem will be built on high quality projects which have established communities so that we can also increase the size of the $BIT community and build value for $BIT.
I think the best way is right now done by Optimism with their OP grants for the ecosystem.
Is that type 4? Or are there differences?
perfect…100% agree. Focus on quality and then move to pushing big numbers.