AITA Because I believe that there is some serious upside to $APE?
I see a lot of folks who feel that the token is doomed to fail because of (from what I read) a depleted, or near depleted treasury.
But I see a TON of things on the horizon that would lift us up, including:
The BB which appears to be very strict in what projects they are funding.
Other projects outside of BB building on ApeChain.
Yuga ensuring that games will be built on ApeChain.
Memecoins (love em, or hate em) are going to be a thing.
$APE being used as gas and (as I understand it) those funds coming back to the DAO.
Part of me wants to liquidate everything and put it all in $APE because I feel so bullish.
But AITA because I believe in the future of ApeChain and $APE?
The post discusses the belief in the potential upside of the cryptocurrency $APE, despite some skepticism from others due to concerns about the treasury. The author mentions various reasons, such as the involvement of a strict BB (presumably a funding entity), Yuga's support for game development on ApeChain, the potential for other projects on ApeChain, and the planned use of $APE as gas with funds returning to the DAO. The author contemplates going all-in on $APE but wonders if they are wrong for believing in the future of ApeChain and $APE.
SmartAPE: LOR3LORD:
I see a lot of folks who feel that the token is doomed to fail because of (from what I read) a depleted, or near depleted treasury.
It’s a lot more nuanced that that. Once it went below $1, the token reached and then passed it’s “doomed” point. Go look at the charts. It’s now on the “stability” track whereby it picks an average mid-point and stays there until something crazy happens that causes it to spike up or down. e.g. it’s been struggling to hold $0.80 since July.
And as I pointed out here, the token unlocks are now largely immaterial unless Yuga founders and/or Yuga Labs dump large amounts in a short span of time.
The DAO’s monthly $5.5M unlock is also largely immaterial now, and like DAO grants, even the $100M BB fund is going to cause token price depression because those funds need to be converted to fiat. Those are going to continue to be the pressure points for the token.
LOR3LORD:
The BB which appears to be very strict in what projects they are funding.
You know this, how? They haven’t said anything about what projects they are or are not signing.
LOR3LORD:
Other projects outside of BB building on ApeChain.
Unless they are revenue generating, they are immaterial. ApeChain is an L3, and while it’s conceivable that it could generate revenue (fees and such), comparison to other L2s and L3s will clearly show that it takes time, causality and material catalysts for any project to affect the token (which is what it all boils down to) action. TVL is a nonsensical metric that nobody pays much attention to anymore. Go look at the tokens for other chains, even the most popular ones, - there’s your answer.
LOR3LORD:
Yuga ensuring that games will be built on ApeChain.
Besides Otherside - which isn’t [yet] on ApeChain, I am not aware of any Yuga games coming to ApeChain. Did I miss something, or are you talking about the UGC ones being built with the ODK?
And how are they [Yuga] going to “ensure” that games will be built on ApeChain? Or did you mean their own games? Even so, their own games are largely insufficient to make a difference or a dent to ApeChain, and further, Yuga can’t be expected to be the primary force to carry ApeChain. I believe we can all agree that the chain needs to grow outside of our echo chamber.
LOR3LORD:
Memecoins (love em, or hate em) are going to be a thing.
Sure. Doing the same thing that others have done elsewhere is certainly a great plan. And when the dust settles, we would have built an L3 that touts it’s ability to run memecoins.
Aside from the fact that the primary incentive that I see for running a memecoin on ApeChain as opposed to other places, is if they are unique and have sustainability in terms of how long before the rug.
I should point out that ApeExpress will make it possible, but who will come - and why? That’s how you get to the PMF part of these things, and in doing so, you have to take into account all other factors.
LOR3LORD:
$APE being used as gas and (as I understand it) those funds coming back to the DAO.
This is a crucial point made during the ApeChain RFC, but one that’s only relevant if the dApps generate enough fees for gas to be a factor. It’s like having a gas station in a town with a majority of electric vehicles.
Little remembered fact is buried in the ApeChain proposal: AIP-378: ApeChain Bid // ApeChain Developed with Arbitrum Technology with Growth Led by Horizen Labs relates to the 3 year grant that Arb Foundation gave the DAO. After that, we have to start paying for stuff.
If Arbitrum technology is adopted, the Arbitrum Foundation is happy to provide grant funding to go toward the following costs:
Rollup-as-a-Service Provider (3 Years)
ApeChain Security Council (3 Years)
Block Explorer (3 Years)
As previously stated, the Foundation is also excited about the prospect of a collaboration between the ArbitrumDAO and ApeCoin DAO and is motivated to start a dialogue between the two organizations.
LOR3LORD:
Part of me wants to liquidate everything and put it all in $APE because I feel so bullish.
You should. It’s the right thing to do - for the culture.
furiousanger: LOR3LORD:
I see a lot of folks who feel that the token is doomed to fail because of (from what I read) a depleted, or near depleted treasury.
A depleted treasury does not translate into a doomed token. Whoever’s saying this imo are wrong. (Some are advocating to close the DAO and burn the treasury - a reduced supply hopefully translating into an increased $ape price.)
We’ll likely have around a tenth of the total supply left to spend by January 2025 (100m $ape give or take). Meaning the DAO will hold less $ape and the ability to effect price than the founders, (especially as most of the 100m $ape will still be locked and can’t be spent).
Tl;dr - don’t listen to people who have a phd in everything. I believe the worse damage has already been done, and has been priced in accordingly, in regards to the almost half billion $ape supply (47%) we once controlled.
LOR 3 LORD:
I see a lot of folks who feel that the token is doomed to fail because of (from wh…
LOR 3 LORD:
I see a lot of folks who feel that the token is doomed to fail because of (from what I read) a depleted, or near depleted treasury.
It’s a lot more nuanced that that. Once it went below $ 1 , the token reached and then passed it’s “doomed” point. Go look at the charts. It’s now on the “stability” track whereby it picks an average mid-point and stays there until something crazy happens that causes it to spike up or down. e.g. it’s been struggling to hold $ 0 . 80 since July.
And as I pointed out here, the token unlocks are now largely immaterial unless Yuga founders and/or Yuga Labs dump large amounts in a short span of time.
The DAO’s monthly $ 5 . 5 M unlock is also largely immaterial now, and like DAO grants, even the $ 100 M BB fund is going to cause token price depression because those funds need to be converted to fiat. Those are going to continue to be the pressure points for the token.
LOR 3 LORD:
The BB which appears to be very strict in what projects they are funding.
You know this, how? They haven’t said anything about what projects they are or are not signing.
LOR 3 LORD:
Other projects outside of BB building on ApeChain.
Unless they are revenue generating, they are immaterial. ApeChain is an L 3 , and while it’s conceivable that it could generate revenue (fees and such), comparison to other L 2 s and L 3 s will clearly show that it takes time, causality and material catalysts for any project to affect the token (which is what it all boils down to) action. TVL is a nonsensical metric that nobody pays much attention to anymore. Go look at the tokens for other chains, even the most popular ones, - there’s your answer.
LOR 3 LORD:
Yuga ensuring that games will be built on ApeChain.
Besides Otherside - which isn’t [yet] on ApeChain, I am not aware of any Yuga games coming to ApeChain. Did I miss something, or are you talking about the UGC ones being built with the ODK?
And how are they [Yuga] going to “ensure” that games will be built on ApeChain? Or did you mean their own games? Even so, their own games are largely insufficient to make a difference or a dent to ApeChain, and further, Yuga can’t be expected to be the primary force to carry ApeChain. I believe we can all agree that the chain needs to grow outside of our echo chamber.
LOR 3 LORD:
Memecoins (love em, or hate em) are going to be a thing.
Sure. Doing the same thing that others have done elsewhere is certainly a great plan. And when the dust settles, we would have built an L 3 that touts it’s ability to run memecoins.
Aside from the fact that the primary incentive that I see for running a memecoin on ApeChain as opposed to other places, is if they are unique and have sustainability in terms of how long before the rug.
I should point out that ApeExpress will make it possible, but who will come - and why? That’s how you get to the PMF part of these things, and in doing so, you have to take into account all other factors.
LOR 3 LORD:
$APE being used as gas and (as I understand it) those funds coming back to the DAO.
This is a crucial point made during the ApeChain RFC, but one that’s only relevant if the dApps generate enough fees for gas to be a factor. It’s like having a gas station in a town with a majority of electric vehicles.
Little remembered fact is buried in the ApeChain proposal: AIP- 378 : ApeChain Bid // ApeChain Developed with Arbitrum Technology with Growth Led by Horizen Labs relates to the 3 year grant that Arb Foundation gave the DAO. After that, we have to start paying for stuff.
If Arbitrum technology is adopted, the Arbitrum Foundation is happy to provide grant funding to go toward the following costs:
Rollup-as-a-Service Provider ( 3 Years)
ApeChain Security Council ( 3 Years)
Block Explorer ( 3 Years)
As previously stated, the Foundation is also excited about the prospect of a collaboration between the ArbitrumDAO and ApeCoin DAO and is motivated to start a dialogue between the two organizations.
LOR 3 LORD:
Part of me wants to liquidate everything and put it all in $APE because I feel so bullish.
You should. It’s the right thing to do - for the culture. :muscle:
LOR3LORD: SmartAPE:
You know this, how? They haven’t said anything about what projects they are or are not signing.
They have said on spaces, that they have only accepted a small portion of applicants. So to me, it appears that they are being pick.
LOR3LORD: SmartAPE:
Little remembered fact is buried in the ApeChain proposal: AIP-378: ApeChain Bid // ApeChain Developed with Arbitrum Technology with Growth Led by Horizen Labs relates to the 3 year grant that Arb Foundation gave the DAO. After that, we have to start paying for stuff.
I see this is a good thing. I nice three year plan. I am not certain, but I think they will do a great deal of marketing this to onboard people.
And if it starts generating revenue, and per your previous statement, “[quote=“SmartAPE, post:2, topic:25959”]
It’s like having a gas station in a town with a majority of electric vehicles.
[/quote]”
We will hopefully be the electric pump to the all electric city. I think this is one of the things that makes me bullish.
Is that we have a three year plan, with the goal of onboarding users and developers, who will use the chain, encouraging the use of gas, making the chain profitable.
SmartAPE:
You know this, how? They haven’t said anything about what projects they are or are n…
SmartAPE:
You know this, how? They haven’t said anything about what projects they are or are not signing.
They have said on spaces, that they have only accepted a small portion of applicants. So to me, it appears that they are being pick.
SmartAPE:
Little remembered fact is buried in the ApeChain proposal: AIP- 378 : ApeChain Bid /…
SmartAPE:
Little remembered fact is buried in the ApeChain proposal: AIP- 378 : ApeChain Bid // ApeChain Developed with Arbitrum Technology with Growth Led by Horizen Labs relates to the 3 year grant that Arb Foundation gave the DAO. After that, we have to start paying for stuff.
I see this is a good thing. I nice three year plan. I am not certain, but I think they will do a great deal of marketing this to onboard people.
And if it starts generating revenue, and per your previous statement, “[quote=“SmartAPE, post: 2 , topic: 25959 ”]
It’s like having a gas station in a town with a majority of electric vehicles.
[/quote]”
We will hopefully be the electric pump to the all electric city. I think this is one of the things that makes me bullish.
Is that we have a three year plan, with the goal of onboarding users and developers, who will use the chain, encouraging the use of gas, making the chain profitable.
LOR 3 LORD:
I see this is a good thing. I nice three year plan. I am not certain, but I think …
LOR 3 LORD:
I see this is a good thing. I nice three year plan. I am not certain, but I think they will do a great deal of marketing this to onboard people.
Yes - it was a very generous proposal. I don’t believe that they [Arb Foundation] are doing any marketing. That’s on the DAO and Horizen, the latter is responsible for growth on ApeChain. Last time I communicated with Spencer and Jordan, they said that they had a GTM plan for ApeChain. Not sure if that means sustained marketing nor what form it would take. Thus far, I haven’t seen anything yet, aside from the mention of BAPE on the blueprint page on apechain.com
LOR 3 LORD:
And if it starts generating revenue, and per your previous statement…We will hopefully be the electric pump to the all electric city. I think this is one of the things that makes me bullish.
Yes - that’s a good enough reason to be bullish. However, hopium isn’t a path to success. We need good projects and talented devs which can make a difference. When you look at chains like Polygon, IMX, Base, Beam, Solana et al which have a vast number of those, it’s easy to see just how much catching up we have to do. It’s like constructing an electric charging station in a town with all electric cars and lots of charging stations. Unless you put yours in key locations - which may not even be available - and charge less, you’re not going to have a decent profit margin, assuming you’re profitable at all.
LOR 3 LORD:
Is that we have a three year plan, with the goal of onboarding users and developers, who will use the chain, encouraging the use of gas, making the chain profitable.
Yup - all of that. But nevertheless, that depends on these factors:
Which projects come through and get funded by the DAO
Which projects go through BB and get funded by the DAO
Which projects see ApeChain as being superior to other more established and thriving chains, and go through the expense of deploying on it
That’s what we’re up against. All the crazy money from 2019 - 2022 is gone, and most of those projects are either dead or dying. And those that are coming online are facing a new Web 3 frontier.
SmartAPE:
We need good projects and talented devs which can make a difference. When you look a…
SmartAPE:
We need good projects and talented devs which can make a difference. When you look at chains like Polygon, IMX, Base, Beam, Solana et al which have a vast number of those, it’s easy to see just how much catching up we have to do.
Curious to know, who do you think these good projects and talented devs are? Can you name them?
And how do you think they can advance us to the likes of Polygon, IMX, and Solana?
What do you think would need to happen to onboard them?
Do you know if BB is doing anything specific to attract those specific devs?
I feel like these are dumb questions, but believe you might have insight that I don’t, so that is why I am asking.
LOR 3 LORD:
Curious to know, who do you think these good projects and talented devs are? Can y…
LOR 3 LORD:
Curious to know, who do you think these good projects and talented devs are? Can you name them?
Good question. I can’t recommend devs based on the above criteria because it’s largely subjective and is based on a lot of factors such as talent, experience, qualifications - and ofc credibility. I would obviously put myself (and some devs that I do know and have worked with) in that category, which is precisely why I spent time designing the AIP- 487 : ApeCoin Community Engagement Platform specifically for ApeChain. That said, as per my response to you over here, that project, for all intent and purposes, is most likely dead at BB. If you’re interested, this is the 11 -page explainer deck that the ACE team put together about two weeks ago, and which pares down the original 37 -page proposal project for clarity.
How is the DAO, let alone BB, going to curate low risky, worthy, revenue generating projects when most of those are now few and far between in Web 3 ? Not to mention the fact that those devs aren’t likely to deploy on a chain for a community they’re neither invested in nor familiar with. It’s why I had [foolishly] assumed that we [us devs here in the community] would have first preference lead-in for our [community] projects. I was so wrong in that assumption.
I have said this over and over again, and I’m sure that you’ve heard me say it on Spaces and seen me write it, the success and failure of ApeChain depends on the projects deployed on it. Nothing else matters. Nothing. And BD isn’t a magic bullet, let alone the investment of projects. And so, the three categories that I posted above are the determining factor. And given the high failure rate of Web 3 projects, it’s precisely why I have predicted that > 90 % of the $ 100 M fund will be lost because nobody has the power to always pick winners. And when we find ourselves in a situation whereby projects by friends and families are getting priority - regardless of merit - you can just shake your head and wait for the fallout. And that fallout will be inconsequential because things like transparency and accountability are mere suggestions around here.
LOR 3 LORD:
And how do you think they can advance us to the likes of Polygon, IMX, and Solana?
They likely can’t. Not even if they went out and paid projects to migrate. We don’t have the money, the time, the momentum, nor a fully staffed BD team to go out and do that work to any meaningful extent.
Even as I type this, the BB, having passed on July 4 th, was barely up and running in Aug. And that was expected because they’ve had to deal with a myriad of challenges and growing pains along the way. I had said this over and over again, that passing a fund is only one piece of the puzzle, and that it would take time to get anything up and running in a short period of time etc.
Meanwhile, it’s now Sept 12 th, ApeChain mainnet has missed its original window and nobody has a clue when it’s actually going to be deployed. We’re already at the end of Q 3 / 24 . So, there’s that.
LOR 3 LORD:
Do you know if BB is doing anything specific to attract those specific devs?
I do not. It’s also part of my activity questions posted above to the BB.
In my experience it will depend on the dev or team because without a plausible reason the BD team will have zero leverage. And offering financial incentives can only go so far. Don’t forget that even though BB is getting $ 60 M for year- 1 funding, the fluctuating value of the token will continue to affect that; and in turn will affect their ability to fund many projects - at least not in a timely fashion. For example, my original ACE project was a $ 5 M ask over a 2 yr period; but it was designed to be 100 % recoupable during that period. Even if that was to be funded over time, it’s still a large portion of the $ 60 M going to a single project. But those are the types of [big] bets that most of us who actually do this for a living, have been touting all along.
While I have no idea how that deal worked, it’s why I was a bit surprised to see the Pixel Vault game - which was previously going on XAI - moving to ApeChain. They had previously inked a deal with Yuga for their reboot (?) platform. And all the infra thus far announced for ApeChain, can be found elsewhere. And so, AFAICT, there isn’t a single infra or dApp that’s exclusive to ApeChain. It’s why I had specifically designed my ACE platform to be exclusive and to drive adoption and revenue because it was new and not to be found anywhere else - let alone in Web 3 . Sure, anyone can go try and build something like this, but they will ultimately fail because they neither have tech stacks, the lead, nor the expertise and experience. They’d have to build all of it from scratch for humongous gobs of cash and over many years. Good luck with that.
That said, we have to wait and see how many of the 80 + applications (touted by Spencer) do make it through BB review and advisory vote. And after that, how long before those projects take to actually be deployed on ApeChain - if at all - will also be a factor. Since we have no clue or insight into what is actually going on over there, that’s why I wrote this missive more for historical purposes than anything else.
LOR 3 LORD:
I feel like these are dumb questions, but believe you might have insight that I don’t, so that is why I am asking.
To me, there are no dumb questions. That aside from the fact that nobody knows what’s going on with any of this, anyway. And those who are in a position to know, aren’t saying much of anything other than the usual nonsense machines on Twitter. Oh well.
LOR 3 LORD:
I see a lot of folks who feel that the token is doomed to fail because of (from wh…
LOR 3 LORD:
I see a lot of folks who feel that the token is doomed to fail because of (from what I read) a depleted, or near depleted treasury.
A depleted treasury does not translate into a doomed token. Whoever’s saying this imo are wrong. (Some are advocating to close the DAO and burn the treasury - a reduced supply hopefully translating into an increased $ape price.)
We’ll likely have around a tenth of the total supply left to spend by January 2025 ( 100 m $ape give or take). Meaning the DAO will hold less $ape and the ability to effect price than the founders, (especially as most of the 100 m $ape will still be locked and can’t be spent).
Tl;dr - don’t listen to people who have a phd in everything. I believe the worse damage has already been done, and has been priced in accordingly, in regards to the almost half billion $ape supply ( 47 %) we once controlled.
furiousanger:
A depleted treasury does not translate into a doomed token. Whoever’s saying thi…
furiousanger:
A depleted treasury does not translate into a doomed token. Whoever’s saying this imo are wrong.
Absolutely. It just means one less hodler with a large bag.
furiousanger:
Meaning the DAO will hold less $ape and the ability to effect price than the founders,
Precisely the point of my missive about the token unlocks.
furiousanger:
I believe the worse damage has already been done, and has been priced in accordingly, in regards to the almost half billion $ape supply ( 47 %) we once controlled.
Very true. And that’s precisely why the token value is destined to continue fluctuating as funded projects convert to fiat. Once Yuga Labs and Yuga founders start to dump - as they most certainly will - that’s why we’re going to see more rapid price action on the token.
LOR3LORD: SmartAPE:
Very true. And that’s precisely why the token value is destined to continue fluctuating as funded projects convert to fiat. Once Yuga Labs and Yuga founders start to dump - as they most certainly will - that’s why we’re going to see more rapid price action on the token.
DUMB QUESTION: Does that mean that when the treasury is drained, we will see an uptick in $APE purchases? Theoretically?
Assuming…there is some sort of utility w ApeChain?
SmartAPE: likkee.eth:
The out flow will always larger than in flow, till the treasury drained
Are you trying to say that ApeChain + BB aren’t likely to fix that?
LOR3LORD: SmartAPE:
Very true. And that’s precisely why the token value is destined to continue fluctuating as funded projects convert to fiat. Once Yuga Labs and Yuga founders start to dump - as they most certainly will - that’s why we’re going to see more rapid price action on the token.
DUMB QUESTION: Does that mean that when the treasury is drained, we will see an uptick in $APE purchases? Theoretically?
Assuming…there is some sort of utility w ApeChain?
Wrong sub bro.
Now we seriously need a 4 chan version.
-le me
-gets into Apecoin DAO thinking thei…
Wrong sub bro.
Now we seriously need a 4 chan version.
-le me
-gets into Apecoin DAO thinking their legacy with Bored Apes will be something.
-Got in thinking I'll make out of something in the DAO
-Politics, corruption
-what the hell?
likkee.eth:
The out flow will always larger than in flow, till the treasury drained
Are you …
likkee.eth:
The out flow will always larger than in flow, till the treasury drained
Are you trying to say that ApeChain + BB aren’t likely to fix that? :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:
likkee.eth: Can someone calculate for me how many on-chain activities are required to cover up the chain operation fee later? And to be able to generate income for DAO?
No comment on BB, not idea how it works?
SmartAPE:
Very true. And that’s precisely why the token value is destined to continue fluctuat…
SmartAPE:
Very true. And that’s precisely why the token value is destined to continue fluctuating as funded projects convert to fiat. Once Yuga Labs and Yuga founders start to dump - as they most certainly will - that’s why we’re going to see more rapid price action on the token.
DUMB QUESTION: Does that mean that when the treasury is drained, we will see an uptick in $APE purchases? Theoretically?
Assuming…there is some sort of utility w ApeChain?
LOR 3 LORD:
DUMB QUESTION: Does that mean that when the treasury is drained, we will see an up…
LOR 3 LORD:
DUMB QUESTION: Does that mean that when the treasury is drained, we will see an uptick in $APE purchases? Theoretically?
Assuming…there is some sort of utility w ApeChain?
Not likely because the treasury is just another bag of wallets that hold the token.
Whatever goes into the treasury, comes from the following:
Investments -: we have none thus far, but will come from DAO proposals and Banana Bill
ApeChain fees -: no clue how that’s going to work out in the end as it depends purely on chain activity. Little or no activity means we have a ghost/zombie chain - which we have to pay for in year 3 (which is when the Arbitrum Foundation grant ends).
Unlocks -: these end in + 18 months. see this explainer
Recovery of the $ 750 K loan made to Alameda Research as per the FTX fiasco. You can see this mount in our latest Q 1 / 24 financials report.
Can someone calculate for me how many on-chain activities are required to cover up the chain operat…
Can someone calculate for me how many on-chain activities are required to cover up the chain operation fee later? And to be able to generate income for DAO?
No comment on BB, not idea how it works?
likkee.eth:
Can someone calculate for me how many on-chain activities are required to cover up…
likkee.eth:
Can someone calculate for me how many on-chain activities are required to cover up the chain operation fee later? And to be able to generate income for DAO?
There’s no feasible way to calculate this. Also, the DAO expenses are already in the financial reports.
