Projects
![]()
No projects found
Investors
New
DAO Treasuries
DATs
Lend / Borrow APRs
Chains
Categories
Spaces
Influencers & VCs OWN The Market. All Street Beat - Episode 9.
Recorded: Aug. 10, 2023 Duration: 2:10:01Space Recording
Full Transcription
I'm going to start the show in a couple of minutes.
I'm just going to let in public and Serena, my co-host, do their thing.
Everyone get ready.
Grab a glass of water or something else.
Get yourselves comfortable.
And we'll start the All Street Beat just shortly.
Thanks very much.
Hi, everyone. Welcome to AllStreetBeat.
Great to have everyone here.
Still quite a few people, I think, are due to arrive.
So just I'll do some introductions whilst we're getting the rest of the people in here.
Yeah, welcome.
This is AllStreetBeat episode nine.
For those who've been here before, I think you know what it's all about.
AllStreetBeat is brought to you by Commonwealth.
My name's Tim. I'm one of the lead people behind Commonwealth.
Also, I have a venture capital background, as well as many other backgrounds.
But those are the ones that are relevant for now.
And super excited to be here and hosting the AllStreetBeat again.
Again, it's diving into topics that are normally topics to, I suppose, to be spoken about in certain circles.
And that's the whole purpose of AllStreetBeat is to demystify, you know, a lot of these things and open them up to more of a public discussion.
Just because we believe in Web3, the first principles behind Web3, dictate that we need to be opening up not just technology, but also conversation.
And obviously, one of the key value propositions to what we're doing at Commonwealth is to give access to everybody that VCs have had basically privilege to since, you know, decades, even before very closed loop system that we're breaking up with Commonwealth.
And we are enabling access to 99% or the 99%.
And we call that AllStreet.
And the AllStreetBeat is really about, you know, conversations which are necessary for people to be included into for the average listener, the average user, the average social media follower.
You know, these are conversations that we need to bring to the 99%.
And today we're going to be talking about something that's a little bit controversial, maybe, and something that's also I'm probably biased or at least conflicted in.
The topic is whether or not VCs and influencers actually dominate Web3.
And, you know, this is, it's obviously a little bit provocative and the title is supposed to provoke conversation and get people speaking openly and honestly about the state of our industry so that we can take it forward.
I don't think we can take anything forward unless we put the cards on the table.
Like I said, I've got a venture capital background.
And I'm one of the founders of MetaVest Capital.
We specialized in or specialize in Web3 gaming.
So I know how the system works to a large degree.
And, you know, it's not perfect.
And I'm not here to sit here and I'm not here to tell anybody it's perfect.
I'm not here to defend anybody either.
I really want the conversation to be opened up.
And for that, we've actually brought in one of our community members from Commonwealth named Serena.
And for those of you who've been on Wall Street Beat a lot, you'll know that Serena is one of the people that's most active in our community on Telegram and also attending nearly every one of our Wall Street Beats or AMAs.
Whatever we're doing, Serena's there.
So we've asked Serena to be a co-host today and representing the retail, representing the 99%.
And what I think is cool about that to bring her into this conversation today is, like I said, I'm a little bit conflicted on this topic.
So I'm super glad to let Serena also provoke the conversation and sort of, yeah, lead the interrogations.
So, Serena, welcome.
Do you want to say hi to everyone and tell everyone a little bit about yourself?
Okay, request to speak.
Serena, you're not able to speak for some reason.
I don't know if you're joining from your laptop, Serena, or if you're joining from your phone.
Might be the issue.
You shouldn't have to unmute yourself.
I'm not sure why you're not able to speak.
I'm going to let the admins try to help you there.
And I'm going to jump straight to the audience while Serena is getting herself sorted out.
The audience, I mean the panel, actually.
We've got a great panel today.
Super excited as well.
I've got some big names on here and also some people who are very well informed in our industry.
So I'm super excited to meet everyone else on the panel.
So let's start with, I'm just going to go in the order that you pop up on my screen.
So let's start with DeFit and just introduce in 10 seconds, if you can, what it is you're up to.
And tell us a little bit about why this is interesting to you.
But really quickly, if you don't mind, DeFit, go ahead.
Yeah, hi.
Hello, everyone.
Very excited to be here.
My name is Kevin.
I am the founder and CEO at DeFit.
And in 10 seconds, DeFit is a Web3 lifestyle app gamifying and rewarding people for being active and healthy lifestyle.
So, you know, more known as Move2earn, but a lot of differences into what we do being like fully multi-sports and having like pretty great economic and very excited as well to participate to this panel and share my text on influencers and VCs on the market or not.
Cool.
Awesome.
Great to have people who are building as well applications on here because, you know, this is front and center of what you guys are doing and trying to do.
And, you know, VCs are part and parcel of the infrastructure.
So are influencers.
So great to have you on here.
I'm going to ask Kanan also, please just give us, you know, a very short intro.
Hi, guys.
I am a finance creator from India and I write for stock brokers, top stock brokers in India.
I write for them on Twitter, LinkedIn and research for them primarily and then make it in a writable format so that they can share it across their social medias.
And I feature on one of India's top brokers that is Gro's YouTube channel, which has around 2 million subscribers, but I speak in the regional language that's Hindi.
And yeah, I track Indian stock markets and the US tech, not so closely, but yes, I do track the Indian stock market very closely.
And to an extent, to an extent, the US stock market as well, as far as the tech stocks are concerned.
So that's little about me.
And I'm an Indian chartered accountant, which is CPA equivalent of USA.
That's about me.
Okay, cool.
Nice to have you here.
For Makar, we've had you on a bunch of times.
But yeah, just tell us in a nutshell about yourself and why this topic is interesting for you.
Hello, everyone.
My name is Alex and I'm a business developer of a former car group of companies.
We just a few words about ourselves.
We got like Web2 and Web3 applications and about Web3.
For now, we're building a community and given a project, first NFT racing game.
For us, this topic is very close because actually for now we got like open private round for fundraising.
So actually, we're looking for ventures to invest to our project.
And yeah, so it's very close to us on this topic.
Awesome.
Looking forward to having your inputs.
Thanks a lot, Alex.
Awesome.
Michele, please give us a quick intro.
Hey, thanks so much for having me.
It's Michele.
I am a co-founder.
Oh, yes.
So it's okay.
It happens a lot.
I'm a co-founder and the chief marketing officer for Sedona.
We are a custodial-based Web3 game launcher.
Really working to simplify that Web2 to Web3 onboarding process for the Web2 gamers.
I've worked for four previous sellout NFT collections, including Particle that did the Particleized Banksy last year.
I've been able to work with influencers pretty closely over the course of my career, so I have a lot of thoughts there.
And also, we are just entering a seed round at Sedona.
So I'm very excited to chat with the other guests and learn some things from you guys.
Cool.
Thanks.
Nice to meet you.
Up next is Kashagra.
Kashagra.
Hey, everyone.
Yeah, it's Kashagra.
I'm currently working as a VC at ArtStream Capital.
We invest in the early stages from pre-seed to seed, also Series A, investing in anything from DeFi to metaverse, NFTs, identity.
You might know some of the things that we invested in, such as like Aave, Polkadot, Avalanche, Republic, and more recently, Say Network, Blockus, and a few others.
So excited to be on this call and happy to learn more.
Cool.
Nice to have a VC here.
So it's not just me that's going to get the shots fired.
No, I'm joking.
Great to have you here.
Thanks.
Kyle, Ellicott.
Yeah, hi, everybody.
Thanks for having me.
I'm a technology investor and also have held a number of operation roles in Web3 over the last few years and spent a lot of time investing in Web3 as a VC.
as well, and specifically a lot in the Bitcoin ecosystem and layers as well.
Yeah, happy to be here.
Nice.
Nice to have you back, Kyle.
Hatchie Pocket.
Hey, Rose.
I'm Sol from Hatchiverse, Hatchie Pocket, one of our products.
I've got some background in kind of a lot of random stuff.
I did spend a very small time in finance, but it was more in kind of like an analyst and stuff.
It's kind of like early days in crypto.
So what we do is we're a decentralized IP, kind of focused around elemental monsters and kind of like a D&D fantasy world.
And I guess today I'll kind of be speaking from the perspective more of just another cryptocurrency project really in the space and how we see influencers and VCs.
Yeah, glad to be here.
Nice one, nice one.
Yeah, it's good to have people with, like I said, the building perspective as well.
It looks like we've got a nice group here.
And lastly, Julie.
Thanks for having me.
So for me, I joined CryptoFeld in 2018, so five years ago when I was 18.
So I actually joined several funds in Singapore, South Korea, in Shanghai.
So all over these five years, I actually did a lot of investment and actually did PR and branding for the funds.
My previous work was working for Ant Capital.
So we are the tier one Asian fund, and we invested several like Skrull, Celestia, Genesis Save, and some other top projects.
And I feel like we actually know how to hype and do some value adds to the VCs and actually do some so it helps to the investment.
So I'm super excited to chat about this topic and share about my opinions.
Yes.
Epic.
Great.
Nice to have you here.
Yeah.
Great group of people.
So I'm going to dive right in.
Serena, are you with us?
Hi, Tim.
So sorry about that.
Had some technical difficulties.
Yes, I'm with you all.
And I want to extend a big thank you to all of our panelists for joining us today.
I can't wait to see the wealth of knowledge that you're going to pass through this channel.
So I'll turn it back over to you, Tim.
Sorry about that.
Good to have you here, Serena.
I gave you such a big intro and then you couldn't even speak.
So that was frustrating.
So that was frustrating.
But Serena, for those of you who didn't catch the introduction, is one of the prominent members of our community at Commonwealth.
Always present, always present, always contributing, always constructive and really, for me anyway, is one of the people that stand out as epitomizing what we are trying to do at Commonwealth and really kind of promoting, I think, the values of inclusivity and openness.
And I think she's going to be a great addition from a retail perspective, asking the tough questions as well, because this conversation is not complete without retail, actually.
We can say what we can say what we like as people representing VCs or builders, applications, even influencers.
We don't have any influencers on here, but I think plenty of us here have worked with influencers.
I'm very close to several.
So I think, you know, from the group that's gathered here, we can represent most of the perspective.
So I'm going to dive right into it, guys.
I want just a bit of housekeeping very quickly.
If you are ready to speak or would like to speak, just, you know, put up the hand from the panel.
And if somebody is finished with their contribution with speaking and you want to just tail on the end, you can just do that.
Just go ahead.
You don't have to put up your hand.
Just keep the conversation flowing.
So we'll dive right in.
And one last housekeeping thing.
Guys, please, if you wouldn't mind, everyone who's here just tweeting out that you're here.
And let's try to get as many people as possible into the spaces because we're trying to really ramp up the knowledge of the retail user in Web3.
We want to give everyone access to all the information as well as technology.
So the more people that are here, the better.
So I'm going to dive right in.
I'm going to ask the question, do you actually think that projects can be successful without VCs in general?
Do you think projects can actually succeed without VCs?
Let us know what your thoughts are on that.
Let's go straight into Hatchy Pocket.
Yeah, man.
For sure.
Like right out of the gate.
For sure, projects can be successful without VCs, without investment.
We're kind of in an early stage in the market for Web3.
And we have an interesting perspective because our biggest focus is games.
So we are focused on delivering the centralized IP.
It sounds a bit superficial when it's kind of presented as IP itself.
Usually with IPs, you have products that come first and then the products establish this kind of like brand association.
And then all of the, I guess, like concepts see potentially more products.
For indie devs, usually you can bootstrap decent products.
And especially when the expectation is low.
Like right now in this environment for Web3, the expectation is relatively low.
And especially with the internet to begin with, even before Web3, as an indie dev, you kind of had plenty of opportunity that you could tap into.
It's a lot harder.
There's a lot of obstacles.
And you are competing with all of the extra resources that venture-backed entities are, you know, like actually in the ecosystem competing against you with.
So you are kind of like dealing with all that.
But maintaining the grind because ultimately it's good products and appeal to a user base.
And if you can get that, basically like your market fit and a decent product, then you've got something else.
Let the other guys jump in.
Nice.
Okay.
So you're saying, yeah, the expectations are quite low right now.
Let's go straight into Kush.
Sorry, Kushagra.
Yeah.
I'm obviously very biased here.
Coming from the VC perspective, like I think it's very difficult to, I think like what Hachi was talking about,
was like bootstrapping the project from the get-go, which is definitely a viable option.
But I think when you look at the resources or the amount of things you need to actually launch a project,
from initial like development work to like, for example, launching your coin on a chain, right?
So like a VC is able to provide like resources, talent, HR, and also most importantly, funding.
And I think like you need those things if you want to succeed.
I think like it's very hard to, especially in Web3, I think it's very hard to organically establish or form those kind of communities,
like strong communities that you can just bootstrap.
Obviously, this is a very biased perspective, but please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.
I just think it's very hard to kind of create and ignite an ecosystem where if you have almost zero funding,
I think most of the protocols with the exception, of course, like Ethereum was like, you know, the original, like, you know, the L1.
But when you look at most of the L2s and the protocols and application layer, like things that are being built right now, it's mostly VC funded.
And I think it's a good model to get bootstrapped.
There's a very good article written on Varian Fund, actually.
I'll send it in the chat.
And it talks about why it's important to, at the earlier stages, at least, to have VC funding, to have some type of bootstrap.
And then you can take the organic approach to build a community from that.
Okay, nice.
Yeah, please link that.
Guys, don't forget, you can just come in, unmute yourself and follow on from someone else's contribution.
So you don't need to put your hand up if you want to just follow that train of thought.
Go ahead.
Yeah.
I'll make it to respond.
I'm going to let the other guys go in, though.
Kyle, go ahead.
Yeah, just to kind of maybe take a different side of that.
I think having been on both sides of both venture and operations in Web3, I think that there's a much bigger picture to look at.
I mean, first and foremost, can a project, does a project require venture capital to be successful or to start?
Can it be an accelerant?
Can it be a support measure?
Absolutely.
And in Web3, it's not a requirement.
You look at the majority of projects.
Most probably should start off bootstrapped to get their MVP, their product market fit and determine whether or not this is a product that can grow in scale and has a market for itself.
Then can be getting that consideration of venture capital.
And to kind of separate the next piece of that is there are so many options of capital, not just today in general for companies and entrepreneurs, but specifically in Web3.
Yes, you have venture capital, you also have angel investors, you have institutional capital, and probably one of the most important and sometimes forgotten is grants.
A lot of the ecosystems, those layer ones, do have grant programs that can provide non-dilutive capital to early stage products so that they can help grow and scale.
If you are founding in a protocol, in most cases, those options work just fine so that, again, you can establish your MVP, your minimal viable product, you can find product market fit, and then you can grow and scale from there.
And venture capital may or may not fit in your picture of growth as well.
As a company, you should also be looking at building a product that creates revenue and sustainable revenue so that maybe you don't need capital.
But again, capital from a venture side, venture capital, VC dollars, are and should be looked at as an accelerant of growth, helping you to get from one stage to the next, and not necessarily as a requirement to start in any industry, let alone in Web3.
Great. Interesting. I think you forgot one when you listed the sources of capital. Also, retail. I don't know if you brought that up as well.
Thank you. Thank you. I said institutional, but retail. Thank you. That's a good point to note.
So institutional capital, I'm thinking some of both financial institutions and also corporate venture capital. And then, yes, the retail markets as well. So thank you for mentioning.
No, it's perfect. No, it was great. Thanks. Mikael.
Hey, thanks. Kyle Kishagra, I appreciate what both of y'all said. I think it kind of ties into the way that we have approached funding at Sedona. So we have bootstrapped. We're self-funded until now.
Our competitors started fundraising based off of ideas, right? I guess I say competitors. They're building more launchers that are built for work with, like, you know, kind of archaic web or DeFi protocols and making it really difficult to onboard.
And we've always operated on the thesis. Our devs come from Bitco. So we want to build the custodial multi-chain wallet, which we have the proof of concept in the marketplace complete.
We have our client built. We have 25 games launched on the platform. So we have similar or equal traction to our, quote unquote, competitors who have raised between $4 and $35 million.
So we, you know, definitely have a lot to show for where we're at. But I'm curious what you think. So, you know, we hesitated to raise, like, based on an idea.
We wanted to show the proof of concept first to get a live MVP. Obviously, liquidity in the market has tightened up.
It's a much difficult, more difficult landscape to raise them at this time. So I'm curious what your thoughts are, like, given what I've said, like, approaches that you would take for a startup in our position.
Who wants to jump in? It's an open question to the panel.
Let's hear from some of the builders, then, for Makar.
Yeah. Hello, everyone, one of the time.
Actually, for me, venture capitals is really important to have in our project because, actually, they bring a lot of community.
According to their influence and their statuses, so it showed that the product is more stable and more reliable for different communities.
So, from my perspective, to have, like, venture capitals in your fundings, it's really important.
And if you have your own finance to build the product, sometimes you need to split this, not risks, but this monetization of your product just to bring more community to your platform or application, no matter what it is.
So, in that street, we always, and the investors and the community always search, like, products and check their Twitter space and Twitter accounts and some social media activities.
So, actually, it shows for the product a good traction of what they are doing and how they split, like, risks and how they find foundings.
So, for me, it's really important when I sometimes search for the product to invest in.
I always rely on some venture capital that did already their own research and so they are reliable, too.
So, for me, this team, like, it's something like that.
Yeah, I mean, I hear you.
It's quite a conventional perspective and it's hard to argue with.
But I'm interested in Mikhail's point because what she basically said was, you know, they've had real success when it comes to hitting their milestones.
But compared to the competitors who have been, you know, heavily capitalized through the venture capital market, you know, it can become difficult to compete, right?
So, is it the case that venture capital and the VCs are picking the winners in the industry?
And if so, is that the way we want it?
I suppose that's the question I'm interested in diving into.
Yeah, I think Krishan and Kyle probably have a better perspective on this.
I'm similar to Mikhail in this situation where I'm kind of at it as a builder and in a very similar way, like, we'd love to have funding.
It would really make things a lot easier for us.
It's just access to resources.
Similar to what Bob was just saying a moment ago.
It also kind of, like, gives a signal.
It's just, like, extra validation to the rest of the market.
And mostly retail is looking for those kind of signals, that kind of messaging.
Though, to what Krishan was saying, like, as much as the VC is valuable, it's not necessarily a blocker.
It's kind of like an extra resource.
It's an extra toolkit.
It's just, as much as you want it, there's certain things you can control and certain things you can't.
In our case, it was kind of, it was a couple of things coming side by side.
It was, firstly, like, we can't really control the VCs.
We can pitch to them.
But fundamentally, we're trying to use a kind of new technological base.
Like, we have this idea of sharing and, like, communities and, like, DAOs and such.
And sometimes you have a conflict between what you might get out of a traditional investor and what you want to achieve with your product or project or, like, a DAO in our case.
So, it's difficult to perceive certain outcomes from the VC.
And at the end of the day, you get to this thing where, like, you have, like, a limited time and limited resources.
And if you can't appeal, then you know that you can still, like, as to what Karl was saying, there's all these other types of funding.
And I think, I forget your name, bro, Commonwealth, you mentioned retail, which is actually, like, essentially a way to get into the market as soon as possible.
Old school, you had, like, the Kickstarter where you could pre-buy something.
But now we've got stuff like NFTs and such where you can sell an NFT, for example, directly to retail, or you can sell your token directly to retail.
And you get something.
It's not as much as, like, Mikhail was saying, like, you're dealing with people that have $5, $10, $20, $50 million in funding.
And these are the guys you're competing with.
But fundamentally, it's people that make products, not money.
Money helps.
But, yeah.
It's way better to hear the other guys.
I don't want to go down the rabbit hole too much, but I'm tempted a little bit here.
Because what I'm feeling and sensing is that, you know, legacy systems from Web2 and before that were very much Silicon Valley-based, you know, the biggest win, right?
And if you're not the biggest, then you're hoping to get eaten up by the biggest and you get your paycheck.
And then it just becomes this kind of network of conglomerates, right?
And this is all centralization and it all fits in with, I suppose, a culture that Web3 or, you know, at least those of us who are a little bit more fundamental and idealistic would like to see change, right?
We really want, I suppose, a more decentralized world when it comes to finance, when it comes to information, when it comes to data even.
And that's not going to happen if the behemoths, the VCs, the bigger ones, let's say, are able to pick the winners and control the market.
So, I think we have some kind of inherent contradictions in what we're, you know, what we are as Web3 principally, but also what we are in practice.
And in practice right now, it does seem that if you're not backed by one of the Tier 1 VCs, you will struggle.
You really are facing an uphill battle.
And I'm just not sure that that's what we want, ultimately.
And, you know, okay, I'm being a bit provocative here.
Serena, are you there?
What do you think?
And do you have, you know, anything to add to this?
Yes, Tim, I'm here.
Yeah, listening, getting great insight from what we shared thus far.
I want to tag into what Mr. Hatches said about the conflict that projects can experience when there's an issue with the VC support.
And I wanted to see if anybody else has anything to say on that.
And how do you move forward as a project if there is a conflict of interest, but there's still also the need for funding?
Yeah, I think that's a great point.
We've got a couple of hands up.
Let's hope they can speak to that.
Or, you know, let's pick up the train of thought that, you know, I lay down or Serena lay down.
Let's see if we can mesh it together.
I think, yeah, Kushagra, you've been waiting for a while.
And then we'll move to the next speaker.
Yeah, I just wanted to answer some of the questions.
So first, like to Serena's point, I think, you know, I don't know if this is like it's the case for most VCs, but it's I think it's kind of a red flag if the VC doesn't have this.
So like a post investments like feature or arm where basically a few employees in the firm are dedicated to helping projects, whether they need connections, marketing, HR, like whatever they need, like basically having specific people and functions dedicated to helping projects and founders specifically.
I think it's super valuable for founders because as a VC, you see like at least like 20, 30 projects, 40 projects, right?
And then you have to filter through all these projects and you have to make that decision, right?
It's like a filtering system and mechanism.
And basically what as a VC you're doing is you're filtering from this like vast array of projects that's like and then you have to basically filter to see which ones have viable business models, which ones can succeed,
which ones have good like founders or good product market fit or good traction, right?
So you have to look at all these things and then you make the investment, right?
So basically, and to get through that is a huge hurdle, first of all.
And then second, after the fact that let's say we form a partnership with a company, you have to take into account that they might need help in the future.
I think that's one of the key aspects of becoming a VC and helping companies grow.
It's you have skin in the game.
You have to help these companies grow, right?
So I think that relationship is super important.
And I think going back to like alternative ways of funding, yeah, I think there's a lot of ways to get money.
But I think if you do want the like specialized connections, for example, let's say you're building a DEX, right?
And then you need help to, for example, like, I don't know, get liquidity, get LPs.
You can't just go get grants and get LPs.
That's very difficult, right?
So it also depends on the quality of capital you get.
I think that's also important.
So for us, like, we're a Chinese based VC, right?
So we have a lot of connections in China.
We have a lot of connections with exchanges in China, and especially in the Southeast Asia region.
So we were able to help founders expand into those regions.
And we have a track record of doing that.
So I think it's also, what is the value add that you want within a VC or the quality of capital that you're getting?
Cool.
Yeah, absolutely.
Kyle, and then DFIT?
Yeah, a lot of comments on what was just said.
But maybe to kind of sum it up is definitely pick your investors wisely.
Pick the investors that can support you, that are supporting you, that want to support you, that are betting on you and your industry.
But regardless if they have a post-investment arm or they have a team that can be supportive, a lot of that support is only going to come if and when you ask for it, if and when you provide information and clarity, whether it be investor updates and be conversations as a founder, to what you need.
If you never say anything, you never mention what kind of support you need, whether that be a future funding round that is additional capital, that is an introduction, a hire, whatever it may be.
You definitely need to communicate that in some way.
But real quick, I want to tie that back into the conversation of Web3 and it being the biggest winners and the biggest funds only.
I'm actually going to be the villain maybe on this particular space and take the complete opposite of that side.
I think that's actually the right question to ask, but maybe the wrong point to assume.
You go back pre-2018, 2019, Web3 itself was not seeing a lot of venture capital outside of what we saw in the, quote, ICO boom of 2017 and 2018.
Post that, Web3 saw a significant amount of capital from the overall amount of venture capital that was raised.
And a lot of it was actually not solely raised in San Francisco or the Bay Area.
And the majority of new funds, venture capital funds, sizes anywhere from a couple million dollars to hundreds of millions of dollars,
were solely dedicated with a thesis towards Web3 projects or the category and industry of Web3.
In fact, I believe it was 2021, where 5% of all venture capital, about 31, almost $32 billion of the $620 billion that was raised that year,
went alone to the Web3 category and industry as well.
And we continue to see that.
You know, 2023 is a very different year.
And we should all remember that both sides of the coin is, whether you are a venture capitalist or you are a founder building something,
2023 is a very different year for venture than we've seen in a decade, maybe two decades, if you want to go back far enough.
And that has changed the game on fundraising.
The majority of fundraising has slowed down, has regressed, has taken a step back.
But there are still a number of funds that you can raise from, you can talk to, you can build relationships from that are not the top 1%.
That would be more than happy if you fit their thesis and some of the things that Krasaga and I have mentioned along with others.
If you fit their thesis, you fit what they're looking for.
And there's plenty of investors out there.
And there are funds that are $5 to $25 million in size that are funding great projects out there and leading them.
And in most cases can be more active or do have those communities or do have that additional support as well.
So one last piece I'll kind of end on in this note, hopefully tying it all together is if you are going out to fundraisers and invest as a entrepreneur, do not only look at the top 1%.
You're actually doing yourself a quick disservice and going to get a lot of no's very quickly.
Instead, this game is a game of numbers.
Look at the entire venture landscape.
Look at the investors that are investing in your category, that have invested in your specific area and have that expertise, has the support that could be supportive of you.
And don't discount the investors just based on their fund size, whether it's $100 or $500 or $1 billion or it's $5 million.
Find the investors that are going to be supportive for you and your projects going forward and don't just judge based on their size of AUM.
And one last further point is it's not just about the Bay Area.
Yes, the Bay Area still sees some of the largest amount of funding in all categories.
And that is a different story.
That's a different history.
And that is because of where venture capital started and where it continues to be in terms of mass.
But you look on a global scale, projects are being funded everywhere.
When it comes to Web3, we are seeing more investment in international or domestic based companies.
Those are centralized and those that are decentralized in their team structures.
So don't discount yourself and what you're building based on just the big top 1%.
Instead, play the game of numbers, build those relationships, find the best investors for you, regardless of their total fund size as well.
So hopefully that's supportive.
I've got a few thoughts, Kyle.
It's very well articulated.
I don't agree with everything.
But that's OK, because we're here to debate.
But indeed, I'm going to ask DFIT.
Do you think that venture capital is the, you know, everything it's cracked up to be?
What's your thoughts, DFIT?
Well, I'm probably going to have a bit of a different perspective on everything that was said before.
Why?
Simply because our project has been bootstrapped.
And in the second phase, it's been founded by the community.
So we have been operating now since Q1 2021.
We have never raised VC funds.
And I understand that it definitely helps to get capital and higher and get more resources and build up.
But in a way, we have built for the first two years a great product that has launched.
We are growing 15% month on month on our user base organically, which is amazing.
We never raised any VC capital.
And we wanted to raise this year to actually scale up.
But the fact that the market is difficult, some ways is pushing us to find out the best way of becoming a profitable company.
And I kind of like that.
Like, it doesn't have to be a finality that you have to raise capital to build a startup or to scale up.
So, of course, it will make my life a lot easier if I had 100 people to build what we are building right now.
But at the end of the day, well, it pushed us to be as lean as possible and to be really careful about cash flow management and to build very strong foundations for the next run that is coming most likely in 2024, 2025.
And at the end of the day, just speaking about like the main topic of this discussion today, like do VC own the market and influencers?
Well, in some ways it does.
When you see in 2021, then all the VC-backed companies in Web3 that are just releasing millions of tokens on billions of tokens supply and have a constant sell pressure with a 24-month vesting after maybe a six-month lease if it did well and their token going down only.
Well, I'm actually quite proud about where we are as being a community-founded project with a full IDO, the max cap of $1,500 at launch with absolutely no wealth in the project unless some people actually bought up along the way.
And that gives us a very healthy token to make in that market right now.
When we clearly found the bottom, when there is no more vesting token, we know that we are going straight into that adoption curve and full utilities of the token built around the DFID ecosystem.
And DC did not own DFID, you know, just to relate to the main topic of the discussion today.
So we wanted to raise this year to scale, but we might not have to.
And I think if a startup does not have to raise and can just grow by itself, sending new revenue streams, being innovating, pivoting, and searching for the really sweet spot for them to keep growing organically, and we're probably going to end the year in profit this year.
So it's not a necessity to raise capital, market is tough.
And I believe that showing resilience in this market is definitely going to make us one of the top companies to invest in 2024 when the market turns around and everybody gets excited again about the market situation.
Yeah, DFID, I'm glad you shared with that.
Congratulations, well done so far.
And, you know, I like to hear these types of stories because it was actually that that I had a little bit of a problem with what Kyle said in the sense that, you know, venture capital funding, literally the capital is, I suppose, what gave us, you know, the industry to a large extent and continues to give promise of extending, you know, the industry beyond 2023 where we are now.
But they're also taking a lot of liquidity out, right, liquidity is dried up.
So it's not the sort of the, let's say the knights in white shining armor that you kind of painted, which I know I'm simplifying a little bit what you said, but it was a little bit too, I think, tilted towards the VC narrative in the sense that right now is kind of the time when builders are absolutely, you know, desperate to get backed.
And we all know that right now is also the time when there's the least amount of nefarious activity.
So you can choose really great projects as a VC firm or a fund, but, you know, it's very, very difficult.
And I understand why it's difficult, but, you know, the capital should potentially be here now and it's going to be coming when, you know, there's, it becomes, you know, again, a huge market with everyone kind of FOMOing in.
And then it's going to go into another cycle.
So I really like what DFIT said in the sense of, you know, the severity of these cycles are also linked to the actions and the activities from the VCs as well.
And, you know, I am, I'm part of that with, with the company that I'm involved with, MetaVest.
But we also have become very, very cautious right now.
So, yeah, I think we need to sort of caution a little bit around the role of VCs when it comes to being the savior of the industry.
I'd love to hear, actually, Kashagra, you've got your hand up.
I know, Kyle, you probably want to respond to what I'm saying.
Yeah, just super quick.
Yeah, okay.
And then I've got to drop it off as well.
So first and foremost, let me just clarify a few things.
So venture capital is definitely not the, the grace and saving group for any industry or technology.
You know, again, it is an accelerant.
It can be an accelerant adding that additional level of capital.
So if my comments came off, otherwise, I apologize.
I wanted to clarify that.
I want to make sure that people understand power that supportive capital can bring, but it is not the saving grace.
And it will not bring an industry up or down fully.
When we mentioned the word liquidity, we need to be very conscious around, and maybe I said this incorrectly, so I'll clarify.
In Web3, liquidity can come from two areas.
Liquidity can be that of liquidity pools.
It can be liquidity in the aspect of digital assets and tokens.
There's a whole world liquidity.
It can also be liquidity in venture capital.
And whether that be liquidity of what funds, venture funds have to deploy and what they do not have to deploy.
And that goes into a whole different set of mechanics that is probably a little too long to go down on this particular space as well.
And in terms of funding being dried up, again, let me clarify, funding is not just dried up in one particular industry being Web3.
It is slowing down in all major categories across the board, across the world.
And happy to share reports to anybody on here on that.
We also have a time right now in 2023, just saw data this morning before our talk, that this is actually one of the most difficult times to raise a venture fund, regardless of category, than it ever has been in at least the last decade, if not the last 15 years of data that many have available as well.
And, yes, I completely understand as both sides of this coin, I'll finish up here.
You know, you're building, it's struggling.
You want that capital and you may feel like, yes, you need it as a builder right now because it is the time to build.
Let's take a step back.
It's always a time to build.
We should always be, as founders or as technologists or investors, we should always be building.
It should not be one time or another cycle's base.
Always be building.
And when you are building something, which has not been mentioned much on this call, which I'm going to call out, is you also need to build products that drive revenue and that create sales.
If you don't and you're only solely reliant on venture capital or, excuse me, funding in general from outside sources, yes, it's always going to be difficult.
So, again, high or low times, cycles aside, you have to find those types of pieces to put into place to help your company grow as well.
But, again, we can agree to disagree.
I just wanted to clarify a few things and I appreciate that.
No, it's hard to disagree with your elegant contribution, Kyle.
No, thanks very much and thanks for being on the call.
Marco's joined us.
He had something to say.
And then I'm going to go to Kushagra directly after Marco and then to Hatchi.
Thank you, Commonwealth.
Yeah, I agree with a lot of what Kyle was just saying, saying that, you know, to view VCs as the white knight, that's flawed thinking, very flawed thinking.
But I think that also leads to the point about, you know, founders, you know, founders have the option to take VC money or not.
It's their choice.
So, DFIT, I commend you for bootstrapping.
I would actually always recommend a bootstrap.
And the fact that, you know, a proportion of founders think that taking VC money will get them to their milestones quicker, that's deeply flawed thinking, in my humble opinion, from many years of experience.
And on the difficult time to raise funds, in a bear market is never a good time to raise VC money, because I would always argue, again, from experience, and I've been through a few balls and bears in my time, is it's in a bear market is when you as a founder get more screwed on your valuation.
So, it's not the optimum time for you to actually be raising.
So, you should always be conscious of that.
And to the, it's difficult to raise, sorry, to gain VC funds.
You know, the latest data I've seen, I think it's nearly $300 billion in the U.S. alone is dry powder.
So, that shows how difficult it is, if you're a founder, to get the money.
It doesn't mean to say that you can't.
You just have to be, to Carl's point, a business that can showcase that you have built a phenomenal product and that you are going to gain traction.
And then the last thing I wanted to say, which is what I put my hand up for originally, Serena, I want to actually answer your question directly about the conflict.
And again, from vast experience, I would always say that the conflict, in my experience, should not be a thing between a VC and a founder, especially if the founder is the one that still holds the controlling stake in their business.
Because if they hold the controlling stake, then they hold all the power, irrespective that they've taken investor money.
That's one.
And secondly, the times that I, and I've seen it myself, I've lived it myself, the times where conflict comes into play, nine times out of ten, is because the founder is not open to constructive feedback.
So, I raise that point because VCs are always painted typically as the bad guy or the bad person.
And that's not always the case.
It is, more often than not, because the founder is not open to that constructive feedback, and therefore it's their way or the highway.
And all we are trying to do is offer up years of experience or knowledge and try to pass that along to help that founder succeed.
Because at the end of the day, when I invest into a founder, we succeed together or we lose together.
That's the bottom line, but not every founder sees that point.
I probably went on a bit long there, so I'll finish there.
No, that was cool, Mark.
I really enjoyed that.
Thanks.
Kushagra, you've been patient.
And then over to Hachi.
Yeah, I just wanted to touch upon a few things that have been brought up in the conversation.
One thing regarding fund size.
So, Artstream is actually only a $50 million fund.
And I say only, but it's like when you look at funds, right, like you see Paradigm, they have a $2.5 billion fund.
But the real problem with those types of funds, and I'm not trying to shoot them down, it's very hard to deploy capital at that scale.
And when you're deploying capital at that scale, you're usually looking for late stage companies or growth stage companies that have been in the market or have very extensive and proven track records.
And right now, it's very difficult to kind of get those things.
And second thing, just wanted to touch upon the fact that the point that you don't need venture funding, but you might need it in the future.
I think right now, yeah, I agree.
I think what has been said is that it's very hard to raise right now.
Like, I'll give you the VC perspective.
Yeah, like we're barely investing in any projects right now.
Like, it's super difficult to actually raise money, because it's so hard for us, especially when you're considering the level of sales and marketing and product market fit that you need now than ever before.
And at the end of the day, we're trying to invest in businesses, not nonprofits.
Like, as much as VCs want to give out money, it's like, at the end of the day, we want to generate returns.
Frankly, that's what the VC business is for.
Like, we want to partner with great businesses that generate revenue and money.
And that's what it ultimately comes down to.
For sure.
I know VCs are getting a bit of a tough time here in the conversation, but you're also being very well represented.
And I think holding your own, I would say, in the debate over on this topic, it's hard to disagree with the points that have been brought up.
But I would like somebody to respond.
And we've got two builders who have got their hands up.
So I'm going to let Hachi come in.
And then I think DFIT wants to come in again afterwards.
Yeah, man.
To what Carl was saying about products, I think maybe I didn't explain it well.
But I really wanted to make a point that, like, there are certain things you can control and certain things you can't.
Like, as a builder, you know that if you put a certain amount of time and energy into something, you can get kind of like, you can have a pretty decent expectation on your outcome.
Like, we know if we put this much time into coding and art, we can get a game.
And with some experience, we kind of know what it takes to generate revenue there.
And then, of course, especially as Marco was saying, like, we look around for funding because, of course, like, people need to pay their rent.
They need to eat.
So if you want to get a larger team, you need to get some kind of access to resources.
So if you're, you know, like, especially games, like we're building games, it takes quite a bit to turn that product into something that generates revenue.
Like, you can't really make a vertical slice and make money from retail, especially in game dev.
It's very competitive.
So you're out looking for funding.
But in terms of that conflict, to bring it back in, the VCs have their own objective, which is, like, to return money most of the time as quickly as possible.
And without the, like, I guess, like, foundational thinking of having this company last for a very, very long time.
It's like they have their own period at which, to them, they've got, like, I want to, like, double my money in the next six months kind of thing.
Just as an example.
And you might be thinking, like, we need to set up this kind of structure in the product and this kind of monetization strategy to be, like, maybe potentially much better off in a, like, two-year or four-year period.
And in that way, maybe a 20-year period.
But it's just kind of, like, difficult to find the right fit, difficult to find the right deal, especially in these kind of situations, like Marco was saying.
Now it's a bear market.
So you're giving away much more for much less and then getting that extra pressure.
It's very helpful, desirable, but ultimately you're pushing for a product with or without the funding.
And you can control the product.
You can't really control.
Sometimes you could see 1,000 VCs and you just might not get a yes.
Totally.
I think it was well clarified.
Serena, can you take over for me for a few minutes?
Thanks a lot.
And then I think, yeah, go ahead.
All right.
Thanks, Tim.
All right, DFIT, we'll go to you.
We see your hand up.
Anything to add to what Hachi said or sharing your own thoughts?
You may take the floor.
Yeah, absolutely.
I just wanted to, again, to rebound on what I said earlier in the discussion that has been going on.
VC owns the market.
Well, they don't.
If you don't raise VC money, I already mentioned that.
But I think as well that what's really interesting is that I think the bull market, like 2021, especially because of the wider adoption,
where every previous cycle kind of spoiled the VCs.
I'm sorry for saying that.
But, like, in the Web2 world, when you invest in a startup, you're not expecting to make 100x within the next 12 months.
You know what I mean?
And then you got into, like, Web3 investment, and you're like, okay, I'm buying your token for, like, three cents, and we're going to list it at a dollar.
And it's, like, guaranteed, like, 50x money, especially if we bring good marketing around it.
So at the end of the day, like, I don't think this is really healthy.
And I think this is also why, like, when we get in the bear market, a lot of people are leaving, and we see it on Twitter, right?
So me personally, I have a decent following on Twitter, like, 8,000 followers, and then Defeat as well.
But you can see the engagement across the board.
I'm so blessed because we still have a very good engagement with Defeat because we've been building for the last two years,
and we have, like, a real legit community supporting us every day, and it's just incredible.
But you can see the engagement across the board is down.
And because people invest in projects where they think it's a good deal, and then you have those, like, huge self-pressure coming in with token investing on a monthly basis,
like, for up to 20% or 25% of the whole supply.
And I don't think this is healthy for the space.
I don't think this is healthy for Web3 because all of those retail people that come in the bull market,
and, yes, a bit for more in, but then they get down bad, and then they probably just leave the space altogether.
So I'm really pleased about where we are.
Actually, I enjoy the beer market, all right?
Of course, I like when everything is going up.
But 2023 is just amazing.
The signal-to-noise ratio is down so much that I am having the best collaboration ever.
Like, when I wanted a fiat on-ramp solution two years ago, I was asked for $100,000, and I never paid for it.
Now, in 2023, I get it for free, and we do cross-marketing activities.
How amazing is that?
So everything is so inflated in the bull.
Everything comes back to normal in the beer.
And this is going to be amazing going into the next cycle knowing that there is no pressure on my token.
And right now, I'm raising funds.
I'm raising seed round for the first time ever.
But I'm actually raising through Business Angel from Web2, from the sport industry.
So we are all part of two industries, right?
The Web3 and whatever target industry we have, being ticketing or sport or anything.
But raising from Web2 people, it takes a lot more convincing skills,
but they don't have these expectations of making 100x in 12 months.
So I think this is a healthier way, and this is the path that we're taking.
Absolutely.
That's much understood.
Thank you so much, DFIT.
So I want to shift a little bit and ask a question from a retail perspective directed to VCs,
but anyone can answer.
Our listeners or our other panelists can answer.
So I want to ask about what it means or what are the reasons why a VC would choose to remain anonymous.
Now, for me personally, when I'm doing my due diligence search for projects to invest in,
I have had the criteria of looking at the financial backing of a project as a part of the criteria for making my decision.
But that's not something that I would hang it completely on, you know,
seeing what a lot of projects have suffered, even being backed by top tier financial firms like Pantera, Sequoia.
And we have seen the likes of them in the prior months and years.
So why would you say a VC would choose to remain anonymous?
I think Mr. Marco spoke a little bit on VCs get a rep for being the bad guy all the time, or often rather.
So maybe that's the reason.
But anyone who would like to chime in and answer that on reasons why VCs would want to stay anonymous with their backings,
that would be greatly appreciated.
All right, Kashagra, you can go ahead.
I see your hand up first.
Go ahead.
Take it away.
Yeah.
So, I mean, personally, for us at Archstream, we're not anonymous.
So if you go on our website, you can see the current members.
Like, we're pretty open about, like, who we are and, like, what we invest in.
But there are some VCs that don't like to reveal their investments for sure, or they're pretty opaque about their process.
And I think this is not just a Web3 problem, but this is a VC industry, like, I guess, trend or problem.
So I guess, like, my interpretation of when you say anonymous is, like, the VCs are not either, like, deciding to reveal their investments or they are choosing to remain anonymous on, like, for example, when they're on a call with you or something.
I think the second case is more rare.
I think it's usually a Web3 thing where, like, VCs are trying to remain anonymous.
And I personally don't agree.
I think I don't think that's a great thing to do.
But I do see their perspective.
It's just, like, for example, I've gone on calls with VCs where they don't like to show their face on camera, which is completely fine.
It's just, I think it's from their perspective, it's, like, more of a protection thing.
And, you know, I can't give you an exact reason why they're doing that.
But I think it's also just to protect themselves from, I don't know, like, they don't want to reveal their identity.
And it's also Web3.
Like, you're kind of, like, in the cypher bunk, like, you know, a pseudonymous era.
Like, people don't really want to give their full identity away.
Like, you know.
So I think it's also that.
But I think in general, if you look at, like, the websites of a lot of these VCs, they don't have all their investments revealed.
And I think that's done strategically.
And I think it's because they don't want to show, like, what they're currently investing in or what their themes and trends that they're looking at might be.
And it might be to kind of hide that process from people.
And a lot of, also, like, this is a very private industry, right?
Like, there's very little data that you have on the VC industry.
It's not like the public market where you have to disclose to the SEC, like, exactly what you're doing, what's your balance sheet, how much you're investing.
And I think that differentiation, like, even if you look at, like, private investments across private equity, venture capital, alternative investments, it's a very opaque industry in general.
And a lot of people don't like to reveal their investments or, you know, like, show behind the scenes.
And it's for that reason, it's to remain private and not be fully transparent to the retail investors, which I don't, like, fully agree with.
But I think that's an approach that VCs do tend to take.
And it's just a general industry-wide phenomenon.
Yes, thank you so much for that input.
Very well understood.
I saw your hand, Dr. Kapil, and then Trader will go to you next.
Did you want to chime in on this same topic?
Yeah, I think it's really interesting, sort of what you guys are saying.
In terms of VC, I can kind of appreciate why VC firms might want to stay anonymous.
And I'm going to have a really cynical take on this.
I'll give you a little bit of background on my stuff because I'm actually a representative for a crypto project as well.
I'm an advisor to the Particle Project and the BasicSwap DEX.
And I've been around this scene since 2016.
So I've seen a lot of projects come and go.
And the harsh reality is the vast, vast majority of projects, I'd say 99.5% of projects I've seen, fail.
If given a long enough time frame, the vast majority of these projects fail.
And as has kind of been pointed out, these aren't exactly regulated markets.
You know, they're unregulated markets.
I'm not going to cast dispersions on the entire VC industry.
But, you know, I'm of the cynical view that some VCs are not necessarily, are going to play with the rulebook given to them.
It's probably the most diplomatic way to say that.
So I'm not a great believer in the idea that every project that is given funding, you know, I don't believe that all of those funds are going into development and all of the, you know, and split between marketing and development.
I'm a believer in the idea that some of those funds, I don't know how, what proportion, but some of those funds are certainly going to go into market making and liquidity providing.
And in an unregulated market, we have to assume pump and dumps.
And I've seen millions, I've seen, I've lost count of how many pump and dump operations I've seen.
And I'm not saying that's VCs doing that.
That is just something that happens in an unregulated market.
So knowing that the vast majority of projects fail and knowing that a lot of unregulated, a lot of activity that wouldn't occur in more regulated markets exists, I can understand certainly from a personal safety point of view, why some VCs, and from a reputational point of view, why some VCs and the individuals behind them may want to stay private.
That's an incredibly cynical take, and I'm open to rebuffs, but that's my take on it.
And that's certainly reflected some of the observations I've seen in this space.
Thank you so much, Dr. Kapil.
Well, at this time, we're going to bring up our second round of panelists.
We can continue this banter on this topic of anonymous VC preferences, but right now we'll bring up our second round of panelists.
And so I'll just give a little introduction about myself.
I am an affiliate with the Commonwealth team.
I really love the project and so supportive of the effort that they're bringing to the Web3 space.
And I fully believe in it and fully believe in the dynamic that it's going to, that it stands to bring to the retail investor sector of Web3 investing.
And so for those who are just tuning in, the question was about why you may think VCs prefer to remain anonymous.
And I see two hands that have gone up that may want to chime into that.
So, Trader, we will go to you.
And if any of our second round panelists would like to tag in, you're more than welcome.
But please give a brief introduction of yourself, and then you can go ahead and proceed with your answers.
Thank you so much, Trader.
Yeah, no, thank you.
Yeah, so my name's Alex.
My handle is TradersRetreat.
You know, I'm a full-time trader of the equity markets and crypto markets.
I, you know, just a little bit about myself.
I've been doing this since before, around 2018 is when I got started.
So I did get my start into, unfortunately, not into crypto right away.
Would have put me in a better position maybe to start off.
Maybe not.
You never know.
But, you know, I kind of got involved with the markets from a trading perspective before the craziness of 2020, of course.
So, you know, I think, I like to think that it gave me a little bit of an edge up.
You know, I had a solid footing by the time, you know, the craziness of 2020 came through.
So, you know, what I do at this point is I teach people.
I do have a community of my own.
I'm all about, you know, helping people manage risk, you know, structuring trades.
And it's not just trades.
It's also, you know, a little bit longer-term investments.
You know, the bottom line is that once you accumulate some wealth, right, and that is the goal, you know, we need to know how to maintain that and keep it, right, and not make, I think this is a perfect segue into what you're just talking about.
You know, not give your money into a project, let's say, that has, you know, an untrustworthy or someone that you can't verify, which is tough in the crypto markets, right?
I mean, in this environment, I mean, I guess let's start with this, with the VCs, right?
What is their main goal?
And, I mean, the primary role of a venture capitalist is to, you know, provide equity, right, or provide capital in order, you know, in exchange for equity.
You know, they want the success and the growth of the investments to play out, and that way they can make the most money, right?
So I do think that they've gotten a bad rep.
I don't really side with one or the other.
Like, I don't side with whether they should be anonymous or not.
I do think, as the gentleman spoke before, I think it's a good thing that we're seeing a trend in the direction similar to what we see in the equity markets, right, where VCs are, even though they're not regulated, right, and it is more of a Wild Wild West situation, you know, we want to see that trend in transparency, right?
But you do have to remember, and I think it's important for us all to remember, you know, where this was only a few years ago, right?
Not only did, you know, crypto kind of have not a bad rep, but it, you know, it definitely has, there was definitely a lot of issues going on, like any new market, I guess you could say.
The thing, one of the things that stands out to me, I guess, is that, you know, I remember I have talked with, I actually have a couple friends that I've met along the way
that have been involved with a couple projects, NEAR and Stacks are two of them, that I don't know if he's, I don't think he's involved with either of them now at this point,
but was there, you know, pretty much, not in the very beginning, but he was for Stacks, I know, in the beginning, and, you know, he had a good point, pointed out one time,
he's like, you know, people, VCs can come in, and it's not just VCs, but builders can do this too.
They can come in and do exactly what they were supposed to do, right, and with flying colors.
And perform extremely well, and the project falls apart, it goes, you know, it goes down the toilet.
And, you know, there is a stigma that's attached to that, and almost a helplessness, right, that, and I'm not trying to give excuses to anybody,
but I do think, if I try to put myself in that position, you know, in that day and age, you know, three, four years ago, as, you know,
especially in 2020, when Bitcoin exploded, there was a lot of, you know, attention being poured into the crypto markets,
and the amount of money that just flowed in, honestly, it was astonishing, right?
I mean, it's been an amazing space with lots of opportunities, but there's, you know, as somebody who's trying to hold the reputation,
I can see why possibly somebody, is there a speaker going on?
Oh, never mind, serious.
You know, I can see why, you know, VCs would want to maintain anonymity, right?
So, that's kind of my first, Serena, can I, I can hear, I think you're, you're getting some feedback.
Yeah.
All right, so anyways, I won't, I won't rag, go on and on about this one topic,
but I do think it's smart to understand, like, where we come from, right, and where we're trying to go.
So, and where we're trying to go is, you know, transparency, right?
We want VCs and influencers that are accountable, you know, somebody, you know, that you can, you can back check, you know,
back test and say, look, you know, what projects have you done?
I do think being a tight-knit community, that you do have an opportunity to see some of the same faces,
some of the same, some of the same companies, and, you know, there's a benefit to that, right?
It's some, you know, you can kind of have a reputation, something to compare to.
The downside to that, of course, is that, you know, there is a control factor, which, you know,
a lot of, of this, of this environment doesn't want, you know, the community obviously tries to tend away from centralized control overall.
You know, whether, whether or not you're a Bitcoiner or, you know, someone that's more into like Ethereum or, you know,
if you like, like Near, I've actually, I've been a big fan of Near over the years.
You know, I think it opens up the doors for a lot of, you know, a lot of builders, a lot of developers to, you know,
to come and, and be able to build something that isn't going to necessarily just fall apart, right?
Because the project is new.
So, you know, I have, I have a lot more notes on this because I, I did know that this was kind of going to kind of be an area,
but I don't want to ramble on too much.
I do appreciate you having me here.
And I'm definitely going to continue the conversation.
I just want people to, you know, from this standpoint to understand like where we came from and where we're going at this point, you know,
and I do think, you know, if I was to look for a VC today, right, I would, I would avoid anybody that wants to stay anonymous.
Now, and that's the other thing to keep in mind, anonymous to the public is different than, you know, than, you know,
they still should be transparent to the project, right?
You, you don't want to, an anonymous, you know, VC or anonymous investor, you know,
you don't want to have no accountability.
So just keep that in mind.
What we see as on the public side is not necessarily what, you know,
the builders and the developers are seeing on their side, though.
I'll leave it.
Awesome.
Thank you so much, Trader.
Okay.
Ms. Dorothy, I see your hand up.
Thank you so much for your patience.
We'll go to you.
If you had something to add on that,
or if you wanted to chime in wherever you see fit, go ahead.
We're ready to hear you.
I think there are, in general, different types of VCs in the market.
One particular type is more thesis driven.
They put their face out there and they try to drive thought leadership and sort of build up new trends.
And they would also try to lead projects or at least take a big chunk of the project in their earlier rounds.
You can, of course, see Paradigm, Pantera, Polychain and the like being in this category.
And there is another type, which is more, I would say, CT influencer funds.
They're not really structured in the proper fund way.
They don't really necessarily have a corporate structure.
It's more like a syndicate.
They chip in when they see good projects.
Because they're KOLs, they have good access and good deal flow.
And projects want to have their support to get the project name out there and get more attention from the market.
But for these influencers, a lot of them are anonymous to begin with.
I think for them, they started off in crypto with a persona.
Actually, a lot of them are even pretending to be a girl or just using a female persona to build their influence.
So, it's not necessarily, I would say it's not necessarily bad to have anonymous VCs.
I just feel like there are different types of VCs in the market.
And they also have different purposes.
For projects to work with those non-VCs, it's also fine.
Actually, most of these KOLs are not anonymous to people in the space.
Like, if you ever raise capital from them, they'll meet you in person and you know their real name anyways.
So, it's kind of just anonymous to the public.
But, of course, there are scammers in the space.
And even with non-anonymous VCs, there are scammers.
And there are projects that are dumpers or, sorry, there are VCs that are just pump and dump shops.
Or they dump on the projects in a malicious way.
So, to be honest, I don't think whether they're anonymous is a big issue as long as you know who you are dealing with and whether you can trust them.
Thank you so much, Dorothy.
That was very great.
Okay, I'd like to shift the conversation a little bit and talk about influencers.
Because the talk of the day is, do VCs and influencers own the market?
I'd like to go to Mr. Michael from our second panelist guest.
Mr. Michael Lamothe, if you're there, we'd like to hear from you and hear some thoughts on how you feel about influencers as it relates to if they own the market or control the market or have any type of effect on market conditions and things of that nature.
Sure, thanks so much for having me.
I appreciate being on.
My name is Michael Lamothe.
I'm a stock trader.
I'm a trading coach, educator, and author.
I've been trading for closing in on 25 years.
And the book that I just wrote called The Trading Mind Wheel focuses on a lot of the skills that are needed for trading.
And so when I start to think about influencers and people that can influence the market, well, one of the things that I mentioned in my book is that historically markets have been moved by the major institutions of the world, major hedge funds, pension funds.
People with very, very deep pockets, and it's recent that people have been able to come together and collaborate and move markets, just like what we saw with the likes of AMC, GME, and others like that.
So I feel like influencers have the ability to influence markets.
So when you're able to behave like an institution, then you do have the ability to move markets.
But even then, it's short-lived because if price is going to have a sustained move, then it needs to have the buy-in of all different types of people, all different types of strategies.
It's all going to run the gamut, so it'll be a unique situation where, let's say you're able to have a massive short squeeze, like in the case of GME or AMC.
Or you could even have something similar, I'm sure, in the world of crypto, where you'd be able to run price up.
But eventually, things will normal out.
The question from a retail perspective is, well, how can I use this as an opportunity to make money and put some of this into my own pocket?
And so I think that the answer to that is to look for low-risk opportunities where you're able to skew the rewards-risk ratio in your favor.
So that's a bunch of lingo.
What does that mean?
So you're basically looking for spots where you could get in at a high-probability area.
And by high probability, you could have a 50-50 shot at a winning trade.
And so long as the reward side of the equation is significantly more than what you're risking, then that could be a winning trade.
Kind of like a coin flip, if somebody paid you $2 on heads and you lost a dollar on tails, then that would work out.
So a little off track there, but long story short, yeah, I think that influencers can influence the market when they get large pools of people to move in a direction.
I think that they could do that for brief periods of time, and then market activity takes over.
Thank you so much, Mr. Michael.
Much appreciated.
Okay, I see your hands, Marco and Kashagra.
I'm so sorry.
I'd like to go to one of our second-round panelists to give them a chance to speak or see if any of them would like to chime in.
If not, we can take your questions.
Second-round panelists, do you guys have anything to say on what Mr. Michael said, or would you allow me to take these hands?
All right, Mr.
Sorry, Dr. Kapil, you are part of our second round.
Go ahead.
Yeah, so I do have a lot of stuff to say on this, but I'll kind of condense it.
Firstly, I'll introduce myself because it'll put a context for what I'm about to say.
My involvement in crypto, as I said earlier, it actively goes back to 2016.
And on the topic of influencers, what brought me back into crypto, I was aware of Bitcoin back in 2011 and 2012.
I didn't buy in back then.
And I emotionally paid for that, and I blotted myself out of crypto for a couple of years.
Randomly, in my Google News feed, one day, an article on Vox by a storm in the name of journalist, Varuni Vera, and she was talking about Ethereum.
And she was talking about Ethereum after they'd launched the DAO, which was basically their big project to kind of create decentralized governance within their chain.
And she explained what Ethereum was, and she explained what smart contracts were.
And up to that point, I'd had a little bit of experience running my own businesses, basically failing at this.
But one of the things I learned in running this is, you know, I thought, OK, Ethereum, smart contracts, this creates convenience.
And I can see how it creates convenience by removing middlemen, because smart contracts as a concept hadn't really been touted around.
So I was like, OK, I could instantly see the value of smart contracts, because I could see how they were removing middlemen in the chain of financial transactions, which would increase efficiency, which in turn would indirectly generate revenue.
I could see the efficiency.
I could see the convenience factor.
I thought, that is investment grade to me.
Just some weird gut feeling.
And I bought tons and tons of this in early 2016.
And I just held it.
I literally watched the value of my investment, half, and then go up 1,000x.
And I pretty much could have argued, said to myself, I'm done with the space.
But what I'm trying to get at in mentioning it is, what is an influencer?
Well, she was an influencer to me.
That's a news publication or a journal doing honest journalistic reporting, simply stating what the facts were,
rather than trying to tell me whether to buy or sell.
I simply had a collected account of the facts.
And I used my knowledge and my understanding of investment theory to go, right, that is something I'm getting in on.
And that worked for me.
Now, you see, now, since then, just to give a bit more perspective, you know, how I became an advisor to the Particle Project and Basic Swapdex.
Well, I've got to explain what that is, first of all.
And then you'll sort of understand why I've been sticking around all these years.
Well, the Particle Project was basically touted as a KYC-free, third-party-free, decentralized eBay,
where you could create a marketplace or an infinite number of marketplaces where anyone could be a buyer, anyone could be a seller,
and goods could be traded online in cryptocurrency.
They were using their own token, the Part token.
And this really intrigued me because I thought, this is a privacy-focused eBay.
This is an eBay without logins, without analytics tracking.
You know, as an end user, as a retail person who appreciated privacy,
who didn't want my personal information being spread out to multiple companies where it could be breached, hacked,
shared around to bad actors, I thought, this is really interesting.
So, I got in on that.
And I kind of was more involved actively within the communities, within the forums.
I was following the development.
I bought in.
You know, I used my own fiat to buy tokens.
I never at any point asked for tokens from the project.
That's not the kind of influence it was.
I would simply articulate what I understood about the vision and the potential in terms of the retail and enterprise applications of something like this,
in terms of, you know, potential to market.
So, I became an advisor.
And, you know, that's the ironic thing is for a period of time when that project was a bit more in the limelight.
And I know the inner workings of it.
I know they had sort of a, they had a community donation-based crowdfunding model in its very early days.
And they used some of that seed money to partner up with influencers to help promote the project.
I'm very much aware of that.
And that did bring attention to the project.
And that did bring a community, as it were.
It did help build a community.
So, the influencers that project had utilized with some of the seed money it raised was helpful in growing the community.
But, by and large, there was a significant chunk of the community, perhaps later on in the bull market,
which were coming to the project purely for speculative reasons.
And when you've got that pressure and you can see the prices going up, it's very hard not to get caught up in the speculative hype
and not to go, this is the next big thing.
It's going to happen today, today, today.
Because the reality is, especially if you're naive to a sector, you know, the development of these projects takes time.
And, you know, we watched our coin price go from $10 to $50.
And literally, I've watched it go all the way down to $0.25.
But the point is, even when it was going down and all of the community that had come to it,
because there were speculators, was fleeing, exiting,
we still had a substantial community left behind because they really understood our mission.
They understood the value of the service that we were building, and they wanted to be a part of it.
And they were willing to accept that this was a long-term game,
that eventually they could see that we were delivering the updates.
I speak as if I'm a team member, I'm an advisor, but they could see that, you know,
the project was delivering the updates as they said they would.
They were delivering the products and the services they said they would.
They had a very clear roadmap outlined towards adoption, and they've been moving towards that.
And it's taken time.
And you've done that on very, very limited resources, I might add.
But that's the thing.
When your investment place is clear, when your reasons to understand the value of the project,
when there is value to a project, when you can see the applications, the market potential,
and when you know that that's been articulated clearly within your community,
sometimes that's enough.
That's all it takes to motivate your developers, motivate your community, just to say,
that's okay, we'll just keep going.
We'll just keep going.
It doesn't matter what bear markets or bull markets come through.
I've been through about, well, let's see, this will be my third bear.
And I've watched two previous bull cycles where, you know, certainly the last one,
where we weren't the beneficiary of this at all.
And that's simply because we had to use our limited resources,
not on influencers, not on marketing,
but to develop towards our long-term stated aims.
Now, eventually, we will get to a point,
and I say this because we'll get to the point where we probably will start using more of our funds.
And the funding, by the way, that comes through a decentralized treasury model.
So we're a proof-of-stake chain, or the part token's a proof-of-stake chain,
and half of our block rewards go to a decentralized treasury,
and there's voting to determine how that gets spent.
We have been focused on just developing our milestones.
One of the things we built was the basic swap DEX,
which is essentially the world's most private and anonymous KYC DEX.
It's the only DEX in the world that supports bi-directional Monero,
atomic swaps bi-directionally for Monero.
It's the only DEX in the world that really has the ability to mask the counterparty trade
from an outside observer.
It can function as an OTC DEX.
Our intention with building that was to integrate that into our e-commerce platform,
and then build a web framework, because we realize that actually a lot of this
is about building convenience, and we realize that a lot of the development
that we're doing is about building convenience to the end user.
And there are people who want privacy, but there's no convenience in privacy right now.
And we're trying to bring that convenience level of privacy to e-commerce.
So when we integrate our DEX into our eBay-type platform,
we're going to open up a whole range of liquidity opportunities
to so many cryptocurrency coins for non-speculative usage.
And to me, that's exciting, because my case as an influencer is really clear at that point.
It's very easy for me to then go, hey, guys, just go here, use this, do this,
rather than you have to go through 100 steps to use our product.
And I think that's the thing. Influencers are helpful, and they're helpful for short term.
You know, if your product's not there, an influencer's only going to be helpful
for the short term. If your product is there, an influencer can start off
a positive feedback loop. That can be huge.
And we've seen that with successful companies in the past.
Absolutely.
Thank you so, so much, Dr. Kapil. It's nice to hear about your project as well.
Sounds like you're doing some dynamic things.
Okay, we'll go right quick to you, Mr. Marco.
Then right after, we'll take Kashagra and Trader.
And if any others want to chime in, you're more than welcome.
But we'll take Marco, then Kashagra and Trader.
And then we'll keep the conversation flowing.
Go ahead, sir. Thank you.
Thank you, Serena.
Yeah. So, do influencers manipulate the market from my perspective?
Absolutely, they do.
And we've seen it all of this year, I would suggest.
You know, anyone that's in Twitter Web 3, they've seen it firsthand.
So, you know, if we, somebody like Kim Kardashian, as an example,
who was paid a fee to influence, and I appreciate she felt foul of the SEC.
But, you know, there is a classic example of an influencer manipulating a particular segment of the market.
And over the last few months, and, you know, I'd like to think we're now out of meme coin season.
But if we take meme coins as part of Web 3, we've seen it happen in front of our very eyes.
So, people like Paulie, for example, I think has made $30 million from a meme coin.
So, you know, meme coin has no inherent value whatsoever.
He's made $30 million.
You take somebody like, I can't remember who it was now, I want to say, oh, Ben Doppy.
I think he's made about the similar sort of money.
There was a guy who created a coin called Nothing Here, I think it was, DotEast.
And people just sent, retail investors sent him about a million dollars in crypto.
And there's nothing there.
So, absolutely, I would say that influencers can manipulate the market.
To Michael's point about the longevity, I'm not sure, Mike, I get your point, Michael, but I'm not sure as an influencer, if I was one, and God forbid if I ever was, but if I was an influencer, I'm not necessarily worried about the long term.
I'm more inclined to look at it from a short term.
Of the example of Paulie, if I can make $30 million in a month or a week, then I'd be happy with that.
I'll cut and run.
So, I just wanted to chime in.
We've seen the use cases that are happening in Web3 right in front of our eyes.
Thank you so much, Marco.
Very interesting information.
First time hearing all that, that's very, very crazy.
Okay, Kastagra, to you.
Thank you for being so patient and having your hand up.
Go ahead.
We'll turn it over to you.
Yeah, thank you.
Thank you, guys.
Really interesting points made here.
Just wanted to clarify something from a VC perspective.
Like, I think something that's widely misunderstood is the level of impact that VCs have.
Like, we can't force people to use products, right?
Like, that's something that doesn't happen.
Like, we invest in projects that we think will succeed.
And ultimately, what it comes down to is not us trying to influence the market, but trying to see what the market needs.
Like, for example, right now, what you'll see is, like, especially, like, at least for us, like, we're looking at a lot of, like, scaling solutions and infrastructure solutions.
And the reason that we're looking at that is because if we want to onboard the next billion users, we're going to have to find ways to do that, right?
So that's one of the things.
And also, like, when you look at the influencer marketing, I think that's much more nefarious in the sense that, like, retail traders and, like, everyday people are getting subdued and, like, swayed into believing these narratives that are just plainly false.
And one thing that I would like to bring up is, like, tokenomics, like, something that retail traders, I don't think, understand is how tokenomics works and what fully diluted value is.
And it's a very easy concept to understand.
It's just what is the total value of all tokens if all tokens were to be fully released right now?
What is the fully diluted value that exists?
And also, like, what is the current token emission rate?
Like, how many tokens are getting released into the market?
These are some very basic principles and things that I think we have to make more aware to the retail traders in the market.
And I think, you know, if people are more aware and more diligent in understanding what these projects are, I think we would have a much easier time, especially in terms of regulating these markets and understanding what these markets are really about.
Because as a VC, we're not trying to influence the market.
We're trying to make predictions and bets regarding the market.
And we put out thought pieces and leadership pieces around, like, where we think the market is going to go and, like, where, you know, like, what some narratives are.
But we're not necessarily trying to influence what happens because that's very hard to do.
There's millions of people in Web3.
And it's very hard to just say that, okay, we're trying to influence this.
But here's the direction that we think it might go in.
And here's a very good project that's doing that, right?
And I think what influencers have, like I said, is just they're especially, like, the YouTubers.
Like, I'm not saying all YouTubers.
I think there's a lot of really great YouTubers.
I just want to copy out that.
But I think there are some nefarious YouTubers that are very malicious in the way that they're trying to attract and, like, you know, tell retail traders to buy this coin, which is highly illegal.
It's something that we need regulation on, actually.
I think it's something that's very important to address.
And I think a lot of the retail traders that are out there are, you know, there's some very basic and fundamental things that we should understand as crypto.
And I think, you know, over time, I think more people have a better understanding of what you're actually investing in.
I think investor transparency, at least from the retail perspective, is extremely important.
Thank you so much, Keshagra, for that value added point.
I know, Trader, I originally said I would go to you.
If you'd be so kind, can I take Bloomverse and then ElkNet?
These people haven't had a chance to speak, and then I'll come back to you.
Is that okay?
So, Bloomberg, sorry, Bloomverse, if you're in the chat and you're ready to go, I see your hand up.
Please, kindly, unmute yourself and go ahead.
Yes, hi, guys.
Yeah, these are some pretty good conversations.
I just wanted to give my take on this.
Thank you for having me.
And the way that we've seen it so far is that, so influencers, one thing's like the moral standpoint or the opinion that we might have on how the market is working, how it should be regulated, what's right and what's wrong.
And the other one is just to make the best decisions possible, I mean, according to the current situation and with the information that we have, right?
So, from that standpoint, I think that influencers, well, they're there and they're really just marketing tools in a sense.
I know many people see them as, like, they imagine that the influencers are actually thinking about what they're promoting or what they're shilling and that they've done their due diligence and that they understand the tokenomics and the way that the technical data works and where the token's coming from.
But in reality, they don't really have the time and many times they don't have the knowledge to know all this stuff.
They only know who contacted them, how much, what's their rate, how much they're getting paid and what they're supposed to say.
So, they're just part of a marketing plan, right?
Just like Google Ads or anywhere else that somebody can promote themselves.
They use influencers for that.
And even though I agree that the way that it's working right now, it's very deceiving because there's an element of trust that goes into these influencers from people in general.
So, they're not treating it like an ad.
They're treating it like an educated opinion from a person they trust when it's actually not an educated person.
But, you know, it is what it is.
And when the exchanges or the VCs or the market makers or anybody doing due diligence on your project to see if they're going to either invest as VCs or buy pre-sale coins or list you on an exchange, they're going to ask you what's your marketing plan.
And if in your marketing plan, you don't have a couple of influencers ready to go, okay, you might be morally superior to other projects, right?
Because you don't want to take that route, but you're at a market disadvantage.
So, you might not be the smartest option as to who to invest in and what project to support.
So, sadly, influencers seem to be like a necessary, a forced evil that people and projects need to use right now because everybody's going to ask you, like, which influencers are behind you.
So, we're kind of, like, stuck between a rock and a hard place as projects, I think.
Wow, that's something I've never actually considered.
Thank you for that input, Bloomverse.
Okay, we'll go straight to ElkNet or Elk Finance.
Do you have something to tag off of what Bloomverse said or you can share your own thoughts?
We're waiting to hear.
Thank you so much.
Sure.
Yeah.
So, my name is FJ and I work with the Elk.Finance team and I'm a core contributor and founding member.
So, I've got about seven years in crypto, about three years in DeFi, and then I've been building projects for about two and a half years.
So, I've come from an anonymous background, worked in, you know, Anon for almost the entire time, recently doxxed.
Because, you know, I could say there's a lot of good projects that seek to have influence, right?
And so, to do that one way, you attain influencers.
Now, how influence is attained and for what reason, you know, that could be up to the individuals.
And what I mean by that is, you know, it's very important even for us to achieve some type of social velocity and attain the volume that's moving through the market and gain attention.
So, of course, we want people to demonstrate some influence.
Now, how that's done for our approach is we just try to release facts.
You know, we don't really make claims.
We don't suggest that things are bought.
We talk about how the network is ran, how it's decentralized, how it will be decentralized, you know, the products and partnerships that we're releasing.
But, you know, when we look at the industry as a whole, I mean, look what happened on base launch, right?
Like Bald, Toshi, all these projects.
You know, prior to that, we have the AI narrative being capitalized on.
So, yeah, I mean, it's kind of buyers beware, and that's the way the market is, and DeFi and crypto is going to find a way.
Yeah, but as far as them controlling the market, I think we're gravitating towards a much more enriched space with people that have dense skill sets.
They're very talented, that are building the projects, and same thing for the investors.
A lot of people find crypto, and it's their first introduction to markets in general.
It was mine.
Like, I understood stock markets, what they were, kind of.
I didn't know how they operated, but I found crypto, and then I decided to learn how to trade and do my, you know, FA, my TA, read charts, and study what makes good investments.
And so a lot of those parameters, like a lot of those things aren't found in crypto projects, and I think we're gravitating much more towards a space where they are going to be found,
because the developers are starting to instill those, you know, visible metrics in the projects.
You know, that's one of the things that we strive to do as we build.
And none of it is going to make a whole lot of sense, you know, because we also do see the projects, too, that very quickly will achieve just mega success.
If you were 2020 out of the summer of, you know, DeFi, the DeFi summer 2020, right before BSC hit, and you take some of the projects like PancakeSwap, BakerySwap, BakerySwap had 0.002 cents, and it ran to $8.50.
Well, when you have billions of dollars of trade volume and achieve, you know, a billion dollar, you know, market cap, and you have that kind of success and experience it, you know, there's going to be collateral damage.
And when you walk away with a half a billion dollars, you know, no risk, it doesn't leave you much incentive to continue building the project, especially in a time of pre-regulation.
So you see a lot of different things happening.
Yes. Thank you so much, Elk Finance. Thank you for your valued input.
Okay, Trader, we'll quickly go to you. And again, the topic is about, do VCs and influencers own the market? And then right after it, we'll go to zero and then pick up the last few hands as we round off with the last two minutes.
So quickly, over to you, Trader. Thank you so much.
I appreciate the chance to speak again. And I'll keep this quick. I mean, look, do they, you know, I think influencers are, they have their place, and I think they've done a shitload of damage, right?
Pardon my French, in this, you know, in this space. The bottom line is that, you know, it's up to us, right, as participants and owners and buyers, right, and sellers, just everything, participants in these projects to, you know, demand and create.
And it sounds like a lot of people here are focused on this. So I really want to give them a, you know, give them props.
You know, I think that you find quality people that are going to stick with their word and actually build the project. And that is key. But I think that it is really important for, you know, all of us involved in this, the retail that sits on the side that buys and participates in these, you know, in these projects to, you know, demand a higher level of, you know, of moral standards, right, when it comes to it.
Now, obviously, that's easier said than done. But I mean, we can look around and we just see rug pulls after rug pulls, you know, or in, you know, the influencers.
I mean, just, we all know Coffeezilla. I'm sure people have different opinions about it. But at the end of the day, the work, you know, anybody that's watching that, it's just like, you know, it's amazing how some of these people lie.
Right. And it's not always the influencers, but there are some pretty shitty influencers out there. So I think I want to leave this and I won't, I'll leave it at this.
You know, I think it's really important for us as we move forward. Right. It's kind of like with the VCs, right. We want, we want transparency. We want accountability.
We want to be able to kind of promote it, you know, and, and be, you know, have it be a positive, you know, outlook to the rest of the public so that they will come into this space as well.
And a big part of that is not having these shitty, you know, cheap, you know, just influencers, you know, pick, you know, make sure your project is dealing with the right people.
And if they're not, demand that they do. And if they don't, then leave, you know, I just, I don't know how else to say it.
You know, we, we change the world with our, with our, you know, where we buy and sell things, right. Like who we interact with.
Um, that's capitalism. That's what allows this, you know, this, uh, you know, everything to be, you know, that we're doing here to exist.
So, uh, just keep that in mind, you know, and, uh, and yeah, thanks again. I appreciate everything.
And I really think there are some, some great people up here, um, you know, that, that represent the good side of things.
So I don't want to come off as too negative, but, uh, yeah, thanks a lot.
Thanks so much, trader. Thank you for the chuckle. Anyway, zero over to you.
What do you have to add to the conversation?
Yeah, this is coming from a standpoint of somebody with like 40 plus thousand followers. Right.
And like, I can tell you what I see in my DMS. Um, we're in a bit of a bad situation because like a lot of the people, a lot of the companies out there DMing you, a lot of the founders, when I double check what they're, what they're trying to do, it is just not going to work.
Um, so like in this market and this bear market, it's kind of strange, like rather than seeing more quality, I'm seeing less and less quality, less viability.
And it's a, it's a disservice to people. If you, as like an influencer, I don't really call myself an influencer. I'm a seal, right? Like I'm just an account.
If I go post something about someone, something that someone is DMing me, like, because the quality out there is so low, like the, the believability of their projects is so low, I can't do it.
Um, now there are other people doing it because maybe they're taking payments. Maybe they're not disclosing their payment, um, because it is a bear market and so many layoffs have occurred.
I'm sure a lot of people are taking payments to post about projects that are DMing them and they're not disclosing it. Um, I don't know if there's anything that X or Twitter could do about that, but I can say from the VC side is like, you could put more pressure on your founders to disclose their, uh,
what payments they're making to influencers and that the influencers are disclosing it. I think there is a bit of a, uh, rat race going on here. Meaning like if one company does a bunch of undisclosed payments to influencers and gets a lot of reach and another company wants to do it.
And then the other VCs might actually even just turn a blind eye to it. I think that like someone, I don't know how you can put oversight on this because it's very hard to tell.
Um, or like accuse somebody of an undisclosed payment and be correct about it. I mean, you can guess, but how do you get them? You know, so to speak. So anyways, in this bear market, it is, uh, pretty bad. Um, I would have expected more quality projects, but again, that goes back to some sort of oversight.
So is it that the VCs gave money to companies that they didn't know much about? I think there's a lot of potential there. I think there's been, I made a post about this. There was $48 billion that went into web three companies, right?
How much of that did we see go back into like products that shipped, but it doesn't seem like a lot. Right. Um, I can tell just because like, look in the timeline of X, like how many people are interacting with projects and then being honestly happy about it. Like, I mean, unpaid, honestly happy about the projects that have shipped from that $48 billion. It's very little. It's very little. There's been so many failures.
So yes, there are some very bad influencers. There's a ton of bad founders. There's also, um, VCs who didn't have any oversight on the money they gave out. So we're in kind of like a very awkward position. Um, this year alone, uh, there's charts from, um, the media is saying like, there's only being 0.5 billion invested into web three. The previous years had tens of billions.
So like we're going into a situation where it could be like a 99% drop, um, in VC money going out to companies. And then what does that mean? It's like, if they're not going to get their next round, they might have to go squeeze people, meaning like they're going to go and try to sell something instead of like getting another round from VCs if they can't get it.
Um, I think that has raised the risk of, uh, uh, these projects, uh, like, uh, being viable or being legit. Um, I think a bunch of them are going to go out and try to make sales and do undisclosed payments to influencers to try to make some last second sales because they're not going to get into the VC round.
Right. Because VC money has gone way down. So we have like, kind of like a perfect storm of, um, like just losing credibility across the board. But do I think there's a potential like positive future? Yes. Like I think when interest rates come down, I do think VCs are going to be a little bit happier about, um, giving money out, you know, especially even to web three, which they might've written off at the moment. They kind of all moved over to AI. Right. Um,
I think that's usually the case when interest rates are high, the VCs back off everything except the most, you know, speculative or hottest play, which is AI. When, when the interest rates are low, they can borrow easier or they can, their investors that are going into their portfolio or funds will be able to borrow more, um, or we'll be happier to give them money.
Because like, if you look at the S and P 500 right now, I think like it's, it's quite a bit top. Right. Um, and so, but it keeps running up. So that's where a lot of the money is going instead of into VC funds or instead of into the pockets of, um, web three companies and stuff. So people are just like happy to go to the stock market instead of bothering crypto, which they kind of see as like a falling knife. Right.
So anyways, that's, that's my perspective. The situation is that it feels like a bad situation for everyone right now. It may come back in the future. Um, but I did hear a comment earlier, which was interesting, which is like, if you're a company, maybe you should go to the smaller VCs. That's a great, that's a great idea.
Like instead of these companies trying to squeeze their customers for another few million this summer, go to the smaller VCs instead, get some runway and build a proper product. You know, don't build something that's like, you know, no good.
Right. Thank you so much. Appreciate it, Zero. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Last two minutes and I'll go quickly to Mr. Michael. Then lastly to Mr. Dr. Kapil. And if anyone else has any closing words, we'll hear from you. Last two minutes.
Really, really quick. If you'd be so kind. Thank you, Mr. Michael. Over to you.
Thanks again. So, uh, I would agree that, um, anybody that, that has influence. So that includes, uh, anybody on X, anybody on this panel, anybody on the news, anybody that has influence or anybody in general for that matter there that's going out and giving bad information there that's a problem.
But I think that it's not, I think that there's a bigger issue. And I think that the bigger issue is everybody that's, uh, taking their finger and pointing that it's the influencer's fault that I lost money. It's this, it's that. Whenever we point the finger there, we have to remind, remind ourselves that there's three fingers that are pointing straight back at us. Right.
So we're the ones that are ultimately making the buys and the sell decisions, whether you're, if you're, if you have money and you're putting it into the market, it's on you. So what the question to ask yourself is, what do you want to be influenced by?
What do you want to be influenced by? I would suggest that they need to be influenced by understanding the market that they're getting involved in, understanding the skill sets to the actually make money in this. I would, I would go so far as to say that perhaps, uh, an even bigger problem is the level of access that everybody has, that that might be controversial. Right.
But if there, if we think about it, that like, if you wanted to be a doctor, you wanted to fly a plane, you wanted to be an electrician, there's schools that you have to go through and get certifications to get these things. But Hey, you want to take your life savings and put it into the market, just open up an account, fund it and the way you go. So I think that, um, there, there needs to be more respect.
For how you're going to treat the market, your investments and to, to not just put something in because somebody told you that it was good, but to have to approach the market with, uh, your own analysis, being able to understand risk, how to manage, uh, position sizing, how to manage a portfolio. Um, all these things, uh, are very important. And those should be prerequisites before, uh,
anybody gets involved.
Thanks so much, Michael. Okay. We'll be wrapping up really soon. If you have some points to add Dr. Kapil and then bloom burst really, really quickly. It'd be greatly appreciated. Go over, over to you, Dr. Kapil.
Okay. Well, I just want to say, I mean, it's been great listening to all of you. There's been a lot of really solid insights and I agree with so much of what's been said. My own sort of closing thoughts are, and it just goes back to influencers is that every time I see a news article or a video about someone telling me to invest in a project, particularly meme coins. I think meme coins are a great example. They're telling me to invest in meme coins. I immediately switch off and mute because I feel that's so dishonest.
You should be telling me to trade in meme coins. It goes back to this idea of education. A lot of the people, my background professionally is emergency medicine. I work in the national health, uh, you know, in the NHS, in the UK, a lot of my fellow colleagues, they never had a financial education.
I didn't have a financial education. I'm self-taught. There's no structure in place in our schooling to teach people what currency is, what inflation is, what markets are, what investing is.
You kind of have to learn it for yourself. And a lot of these influences, they come and play to, a lot of bad actor influences play to our worst emotional instincts.
They tell us to buy this, invest into this and use the kind of language which is inherently misleading. One of my biggest bugbears is market cap. People saying, oh, look at the market cap. It's a great investment.
I say, no, look at the daily trading volume and look at the trend because that tells you more about what the true liquidity of a crypto project is and in the lifetime and in the short term.
And that allows you to make smarter, more informed decisions. You know, I wish influencers, I kind of wish influencers at the beginning of everything they said would make it clear if they've either been paid into a project, i.e.
they've received tokens from that project or straight out money of some other form, or if they've bought into a project.
Because I'll tell you right now, any influencer tells me that they've bought into a project, i.e.
use their own fiat or traded something else to acquire some form of equity in that project.
That says to me that they really believe in that project. And that's, that says to me, okay, there's something that's worth looking at.
And it might be that they're fundamental and you don't agree with their fundamental investment hypothesis or belief.
But at least it shows that there's a root of honesty. Now, how you verifiably do that is a different matter.
But I think that that's my key thing. And I don't mind, I said some comments about VCs, you know, who are remain, you know, who are a non, you know, that could be interpreted as negative.
I don't have a problem with a VC choosing to be a non if, but it really comes down to what they're giving and what they're taking.
And I think that's the relationships we need to keep in mind. You know, what are you giving and what are you expecting in return?
And if those, if that, those conditions are clear, then anonymity of a VC or any investor for that matter should be respected rather than mistrusted.
So that, that's where I'll leave it at. Are you buying into an idea or are you selling it?
Awesome. Awesome. Awesome. Awesome. Value, value, value. Okay. Bloomverse, we'll close it out with you. Closing remarks, please. Thank you so much.
Hey guys. Thank you for that. It's been an awesome space and I'm honored to have some, being able to have some closing words here.
I just wanted to say, talking about the influencer side, like we do know that people should look into the influencer before aping into what the influencer is saying, right?
And the influencers should look into the influencers should look into the influencers before they talk about them or promote them.
And we as projects should also look into the influencers when we're planning to launch a marketing campaign with them or do anything about like talk about a mint drop or any upcoming news.
We can't control the current situation or the current market or everything around us, but we can do a little bit from our side.
So what, what we decided to do, for example, is just to look for influencers.
You can look at their track record, what they've promoted before, what they stand for, what they believe in, their knowledge base.
And if you like them, talk to those influencers and just make them part of your team, make them ambassadors, give them a badge,
explain to them what the project is about.
And if they're on board with your project and then, and you're on board with what they stand for,
and you reach a mutual commitment that they're going to be careful about what other projects they talk about and what other projects they promote,
because now your reputation as a project is tied to their reputation as a, as an influencer.
So that way you're being honest about who is talking about your project because they have a badge and they're in a way working for you.
So people know that there's, you know, a contract there and you're, you're pitching in,
you're putting your grain of salt as to keeping the influencers honest and you're holding yourself accountable as a project as well.
So, okay, maybe one project at a time, we don't make the biggest difference, but that's all we can do.
So that's just for a little bit of advice for any project out there that is listening and is thinking how to use or how to talk to influencers,
just to do it seriously and try to find honest people, stay honest yourself.
And that's all we can do.
Terrific. Thank you so much. Thank you so much. Okay, really quick, since it's your last, the last hand that's up and you haven't had a chance to speak,
if you could be really quick, we'll go to you, Dev Im, and you can officially close us out and we'll officially wrap this.
Good evening, everyone. Good evening, everyone. I'm super excited to be here. I mean, I'm a Nigerian and I came for, I came late here.
I wasn't so early. I didn't meet everything that was said and thanks, it's recorded.
So I'll still go back and play the recordings.
But I just want to just say a few things. I mean, the person that just spoke now just literally said everything I wanted to say because, I mean, this idea of influencers is something that we should just try to look in when buying or opening to any project because, I mean, he speaks a lot.
I mean, I know that most of them don't care about their followers.
They don't care about the community.
They are just kind of self-centered and selfish on their own gains.
And if you make the mistake of following everything they literally say, I mean, you just go broke one day because I keep telling people, you can be making millions in this space, but within a short period of time, you can't even account for the whole money you have made because of what?
You lose the money back to the market again.
So, I mean, I think the most important thing is for you being yourself.
I mean, people keep saying, do your own research, do your own research, but we find out we don't do our own research most of the time.
And that is why nobody should be held accountable for any work or maybe you're not being so kind of, you're not being sure of what you're buying.
Because these influencers, they are human beings, they are being paid to push this project, whether as an ambassador or maybe, yeah, as a marketer.
Well, thank you so much, you guys.
And I really want to appreciate all of our panelists for all the time and valuable insight that you've brought to us today.
It has been much, much appreciated.
So sorry to have to abruptly halt the meeting.
But out of respect for you guys' time, we will go ahead and wrap it up.
Again, much appreciated from us here at the Commonwealth team.
And I'm wishing you all a great day.
Bye-bye.
Host
Speaker
Elk Finance
from
Elk
Hatchyverse
from
Hatchyverse
