Cofound.it ICO evaluation and mentoring platform discussion

[lofegs]

I got an email from ICONOMI today about this ICO.

Some people from ICONOMI team seems involved in Cofound.

[magnetique]

I got an email from ICONOMI today about this ICO.

Some people from ICONOMI team seems involved in Cofound.

ICONOMI is turning its current mentoring program (started in November) into a separate venture called Cofound.it that will provide the same level of vetting and counseling to ICOs that is typically provided to startups by traditional venture capitalists and incubators, albeit in a distributed way.

source: https://www.ethnews.com/iconomi-spin-off-cofoundit-addresses-the-ico-vs-venture-capitalist-dilemma

[Wapinter]

Your ico is scheduled for 7 may but there is no ANN thread of cofound here on forum.This thread is also not updated regularly

[Cofound.it]

Hi all,

apologies for the lack of replies.

We are focusing on Slack (http://cofoundit.herokuapp.com/) and Medium (https://medium.com/cofoundit) as the main communication channels for our crowdsale and will not be posting an ANN thread in the altcoin ANN section. However, your efforts in reaching out here are appreciated and I am sorry for not getting back - it was unprofessional of me to open a thread and then not answer. I will answer any questions you might have.

Here'a Live Q&A we had yesterday if you want a quick overview of what we're doing and why: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5x4w8B9AUVU

Jan

[cryptosifu]

ICO is only 25% of tokens?  Seems low, don't you think? 

[Cofound.it]

Hi,

great question. Yes - and no. I'll go into a bit more detail about our thinking on this - tell me what you think.

One of the functions of the token for the tokenised companies is the function of equity - regardless of how the token is actually defined. Although CFI is defined as a utility token,  for us it also represents equity. We will never sell off parts of the underlying company. The actual legal entity is like a janitor, nothing more - tokens are key.

Given that role we feel that most of the projects sell off too much tokens at the beginning of their journey. There is a reason startups do not sell 85% of their equity in the seed round. It's not about how much money they would receive for it. It's about retaining flexibility for the future. For regular startups that might include selling later, but more importantly it could serve the role of cementing the relationship with key partners. You simply cannot predict everything at the very start - it's wise to keep some sort of reserve for future flexibility.

When a company grows large enough it has to take its place in the value chain with the established players. They have two options - accept the new company or try and squish it out of existence. A share in the equity is typically used to make sure the other companies accept it - then, its success becomes their success.

Something similar holds true for tokenised companies - except that at the moment we're all so small and swimming in such a small pool that the big guys don't care about it. But what happens with Cofound.it in 2,3 years when we really grow? Our plan is to have a stash of tokens we can use to partner with the key players from the old and new economy. This reserve will be on a public address and constantly auditable by all so you can make sure we're not selling it or anything - we will communicate our plans for this transparently (but, again, not for at least 2 years).

And that is the main reason for the 25% of reserved tokens. We do not intend to use them to raise more money, but to ensure our place in the ecosystem.

20% go to purchase Cashila assets and know-how. Cofound.it is built upon the know-how and code developed by Cashila for the ICONOMI ICO and the core of the idea was developed by them, not me or Daniel. Plus, we want to make supporting Cofound.it crowdsales for people new to crypto economy as simple as possible - ideally one-click! For that we need the fiat-crypto gateway and Cashila already has one.

10% go to ICONOMI that supported Cofound.it (and still supports it) both financially and by providing guidance and access to their network.

5% are reserved for advisory team. You've seen our advisory bench and I think you have to agree that experts like those are worth it.

And 15% are reserved for the team, vested over 24 months with a 6 month cliff.

I think that Gnosis has showed that the actual % does not really impact token price. What matters is what happens to the rest - does it hit the market, causing the price to plummet, or not. Team is vested, ICONOMI considers this a long-term investment, and Cashila founders and VCs are experienced investors who realise what happens when you dump tokens so I have no fear of that.

We did not come to this decision lightly. It would be easiest for us to go the usual way and we would definitely have an easier task at communicating our crowdsale. But we are building Cofound.it for the decades ahead and have thought hard about what challenges might await us. Our token distribution strategy reflects that.

Welp, this got a bit too long - sorry

Jan

[cryptosifu]

Hi,

great question. Yes - and no. I'll go into a bit more detail about our thinking on this - tell me what you think.

One of the functions of the token for the tokenised companies is the function of equity - regardless of how the token is actually defined. Although CFI is defined as a utility token,  for us it also represents equity. We will never sell off parts of the underlying company. The actual legal entity is like a janitor, nothing more - tokens are key.

Given that role we feel that most of the projects sell off too much tokens at the beginning of their journey. There is a reason startups do not sell 85% of their equity in the seed round. It's not about how much money they would receive for it. It's about retaining flexibility for the future. For regular startups that might include selling later, but more importantly it could serve the role of cementing the relationship with key partners. You simply cannot predict everything at the very start - it's wise to keep some sort of reserve for future flexibility.

When a company grows large enough it has to take its place in the value chain with the established players. They have two options - accept the new company or try and squish it out of existence. A share in the equity is typically used to make sure the other companies accept it - then, its success becomes their success.

Something similar holds true for tokenised companies - except that at the moment we're all so small and swimming in such a small pool that the big guys don't care about it. But what happens with Cofound.it in 2,3 years when we really grow? Our plan is to have a stash of tokens we can use to partner with the key players from the old and new economy. This reserve will be on a public address and constantly auditable by all so you can make sure we're not selling it or anything - we will communicate our plans for this transparently (but, again, not for at least 2 years).

And that is the main reason for the 25% of reserved tokens. We do not intend to use them to raise more money, but to ensure our place in the ecosystem.

20% go to purchase Cashila assets and know-how. Cofound.it is built upon the know-how and code developed by Cashila for the ICONOMI ICO and the core of the idea was developed by them, not me or Daniel. Plus, we want to make supporting Cofound.it crowdsales for people new to crypto economy as simple as possible - ideally one-click! For that we need the fiat-crypto gateway and Cashila already has one.

10% go to ICONOMI that supported Cofound.it (and still supports it) both financially and by providing guidance and access to their network.

5% are reserved for advisory team. You've seen our advisory bench and I think you have to agree that experts like those are worth it.

And 15% are reserved for the team, vested over 24 months with a 6 month cliff.

I think that Gnosis has showed that the actual % does not really impact token price. What matters is what happens to the rest - does it hit the market, causing the price to plummet, or not. Team is vested, ICONOMI considers this a long-term investment, and Cashila founders and VCs are experienced investors who realise what happens when you dump tokens so I have no fear of that.

We did not come to this decision lightly. It would be easiest for us to go the usual way and we would definitely have an easier task at communicating our crowdsale. But we are building Cofound.it for the decades ahead and have thought hard about what challenges might await us. Our token distribution strategy reflects that.

Welp, this got a bit too long - sorry

Jan

Thank you for the detailed explanation.  Best of luck.

[coin-investor]

I have not known an ico coin who has not open a thread in the altcoin section,it is a must because from that thread,you can access all the relevant information about the coin,and this is where everything started,this ico has zero value at all for not doing the first thing that needs to be done.

[oportunis]

I would say they want to copy https://adelphoi.io/ which is still an active ICO...
What is the difference between you and them? Adel ecosystem looks more interesting at the moment...

[Cofound.it]

Hey oportunis,

thanks for the question.

Adel is trying to solve a similar problem than we are, but we are approaching it from the other end. We believe that the key challenge right now is a business one, not a technical one. So we have started to solve the business problems in trying to establish a VC ecosystem: how to evaluate projects, how to find what value to add, how to find the optimal experts, how to coordinate the coaching, how to calculate added value, how to do marketing & PR and how to do a crowdsale. Once we find the best way to solve them we'll work on translating the processes into code.

That's also why we are already able to work with the projects already (our pipeline is full till October at this point), which will mean that we are cash-flow positive from the start. The main goal of our crowdsale are to:

• test the process - we are basically the guinnea pig testing it - we will find problems so the process for the projects will be smoother
• raise awareness - we are getting several project signups per day
• test cool new ideas like Cofound.it Priority Pass that allows engaged supporters access to the crowdsale before the general public
• and finally raise funds so we can expand quicker

Jan

[xtyling]

Is it worth investing ? How will the platform generate profits ?

[Vidale]

Next level greed here. You don't even need the money, let alone basically keeping 65-75% of the tokens to yourself. Hell, no one even needs your company. People are more than happy to throw millions at random ICOs without any form of due diligence.

[Cofound.it]

Is it worth investing ? How will the platform generate profits ?

Here are the key assumptions of Cofound.it:

• blockchain technology will change the world as we know it
• the token crowdfunding model works for most if not all startups, not just blockchain ones, and is better than the VC model (more info: https://medium.com/cofoundit/is-there-room-for-vcs-in-a-tokenised-world-712bf111a9b1)
• sooner or later most startups will follow this model
• startups need help both in preparing for the crowdsale and in setting the foundation for the quick scaling after the crowdsale (more info: https://medium.com/cofoundit/coaching-blockchain-superstars-8ba4b1dfc9d4)
• there are many experts in the world who do not want to move to one of the hot-spots like Bay Area, NYC, or London, to work on interesting projects
• crowdsale supporters are looking for a source of verified and quality projects (more info: https://medium.com/cofoundit/building-a-crowdsale-evaluation-process-44ae86458e28)

In essence, Cofound.it is a three-sided marketplace.

From the point of view of the experts, Cofound.it is a platform where they can use their expertise to get dream jobs. There are 12M freelancers on Upwork. We are aiming for 1M experts.

From the POV of startups, Cofound.it is a one-stop-shop not only to help with the process but to reach out to the existing supporter community. We're already getting multiple applications per day. We expect hundreds of thousands of startups to use this service in the future.

And finally for the supporters, not only do we provide verified projects but also actively work on rewarding them for their engagement, like Cofound.it Priority Pass that allows engaged supporters early access to the crowdsale. In time, this group will become larger and larger.

So this is what you are getting by supporting the Cofound.it crowdsale. An exclusive ticket to the platform that literally wants to make current VCs obsolete. A distributed VC ecosystem for the distributed age. With all the platform features designed to encourage using and holding the tokens. More about token role and value return here: https://blog.cofound.it/cofound-it-token-role-and-value-returns-514a8aeface1, but tl;dr - as the Cofound.it platform will be designed to encourage token use and holding, this will fuel the rise of token value in proportion to platform use. Short-term, Cofound.it team will be purchasing tokens on open market to fuel platform features like rewarding project evaluators

Will we make it? I don't know. But we have a top-notch team, some of the best advisors in the world and support from some of the best and most engaged supporters ever, and will work our hearts out to succeed. We already have a pipeline of projects that will last us through October with some really amazing names. We're forecasting a total deal flow of 50+M for the second half of the year, which immediately makes Cofound.it one of the largest VCs in the world. And we're building our service to use all the best features blockchain tech can give us, and partner with some amazing companies both in the blockchain space and in the old economy. I kinda like our odds

Now, is this worth investing - that is of course a question for you. I can tell you that more than 1200 supporters already think so and have applied for the Cofound.it Priority Pass, which allows them to send the funds a few days before the rest - a crowdsale mechanic we're testing out to try and reward engaged supporters. More info here: https://blog.cofound.it/introducing-cofound-it-priority-pass-7d3ab58fa6dd

[scrimper]

i like this project, this is a huge market...but there is still an open question from me. will we get a share in the platform?

[Cofound.it]

In short: no. Granting the token equity rights is potentially problematic from a legal standpoint, so our token is defined as a pure utility token (more here: https://blog.cofound.it/cofound-it-token-role-and-value-returns-514a8aeface1). That said we are working on mechanisms for value return to make owning the token worthwhile - otherwise, what's the point?

[lofegs]

In short: no. Granting the token equity rights is potentially problematic from a legal standpoint, so our token is defined as a pure utility token (more here: https://blog.cofound.it/cofound-it-token-role-and-value-returns-514a8aeface1). That said we are working on mechanisms for value return to make owning the token worthwhile - otherwise, what's the point?

Welcome back 

I read that blog post. Wanna ask a question.
CFI holders get some proportion of the particaped(who use you service and pay with their own tokens) tokens. Is that right?
If so can we say that actual valu of holding CFI come from that?

[Cofound.it]

In short: no. Granting the token equity rights is potentially problematic from a legal standpoint, so our token is defined as a pure utility token (more here: https://blog.cofound.it/cofound-it-token-role-and-value-returns-514a8aeface1). That said we are working on mechanisms for value return to make owning the token worthwhile - otherwise, what's the point?

Welcome back 

I read that blog post. Wanna ask a question.
CFI holders get some proportion of the particaped(who use you service and pay with their own tokens) tokens. Is that right?
If so can we say that actual valu of holding CFI come from that?

Hey

No, and here is why: The solution where Cofound.it token holders get a share of the project tokens was the first one we started working on. It seems really straightforward and obvious at first glance. However, I spent weeks in Excel trying to make it work, and failed. If the amount of project tokens was large enough to be noticeable for CFI token holders, there was not enough funds left for operations.

There was also a more subtle problem: directly returning a share of the profits (in the form of tokens or other) mis-aligns the incentives of the Cofound.it token holders and the platform itself.  The token holders wish to keep costs down to increase returned value, which is counter-productive to rapid platform development. Using the profits to speed up platform development, geographical and market penetration has the potential to bring multiples of value spent.

[lofegs]

In short: no. Granting the token equity rights is potentially problematic from a legal standpoint, so our token is defined as a pure utility token (more here: https://blog.cofound.it/cofound-it-token-role-and-value-returns-514a8aeface1). That said we are working on mechanisms for value return to make owning the token worthwhile - otherwise, what's the point?

Welcome back 

I read that blog post. Wanna ask a question.
CFI holders get some proportion of the particaped(who use you service and pay with their own tokens) tokens. Is that right?
If so can we say that actual valu of holding CFI come from that?

Hey

No, and here is why: The solution where Cofound.it token holders get a share of the project tokens was the first one we started working on. It seems really straightforward and obvious at first glance. However, I spent weeks in Excel trying to make it work, and failed. If the amount of project tokens was large enough to be noticeable for CFI token holders, there was not enough funds left for operations.

There was also a more subtle problem: directly returning a share of the profits (in the form of tokens or other) mis-aligns the incentives of the Cofound.it token holders and the platform itself.  The token holders wish to keep costs down to increase returned value, which is counter-productive to rapid platform development. Using the profits to speed up platform development, geographical and market penetration has the potential to bring multiples of value spent.

Hey 

Thanks for answer but I couldn't get this part: "If the amount of project tokens was large enough to be noticeable for CFI token holders, there was not enough funds left for operations."


Okay this is right. "Using the profits to speed up platform development, geographical and market penetration has the potential to bring multiples of value spent."

But I don't get it why the holders would want keep costs down? If I had CFI I'd just hold it and then maybe use other projects tokens that I got from you and maybe keep them or use for another thing. The another thing could be buy more CFI. This is also buy pressure, right?

I just want to understand 

[Cofound.it]

But I don't get it why the holders would want keep costs down? If I had CFI I'd just hold it and then maybe use other projects tokens that I got from you and maybe keep them or use for another thing. The another thing could be buy more CFI. This is also buy pressure, right?

This is the basic logic:

profits=project income - operations cost

So an optimal short-term strategy for token holders is to make project income as high as possible and operation costs as low as possible. And low operation costs mean fewer developers and fewer marketing. The tokens would be expensive, but the company would face constant pressure to keep the costs low.

Does this make sense?

[lofegs]

But I don't get it why the holders would want keep costs down? If I had CFI I'd just hold it and then maybe use other projects tokens that I got from you and maybe keep them or use for another thing. The another thing could be buy more CFI. This is also buy pressure, right?

This is the basic logic:

profits=project income - operations cost

So an optimal short-term strategy for token holders is to make project income as high as possible and operation costs as low as possible. And low operation costs mean fewer developers and fewer marketing. The tokens would be expensive, but the company would face constant pressure to keep the costs low.

Does this make sense?

Yep 

As an ameteur investor I'd prefer some token returns as cost of holding CFI. This is just my side though 

Any reson for Sinagpore? Lately lots of projects seem based on there.