I.R.I.S by Virtuals price

Another day in the @virtuals_io trenches ... The frog is still in Jeet Jail ... ➔ Unstaked all the agents I’m not looking to hold long term, will sell these once the 14 day period is up. ➔ Didn’t make the @Vader_AI_ leaderboard, so the consistency multiplier is now gone. 😢 Hopefully can start another run, but won’t be getting any points in the meantime. ➔ Predi is going live today in under 2 hours and looks like they are rewarding those who are pledging points. ➔ Still bullish on ACP, very early stages at the moment, long road ahead. ➔ IRIS is now approaching 10M, one of the few tokens that has pumped on Virtuals in the last 24 hours, while others such as GAME and AXR have retraced.

How to attract a $1bn project to launch on Genesis? One of the keys to Genesis’ success is for retail to Invest in $30m FDV worth projects at $200k FDV Earning 10x to 150x on a regular basis is crazy And creates strong virality & word of mouth growth Most startups fail - applies to Genesis launches too Most Genesis projects will be sub $500k FDV in 1y Yet 3-4 winners will make up for all the losses My biggest regret is not buying $VIRTUAL (used to be called $PATH) at $10M FDV right after having a call with @everythingempty in Dec 2023 You always regret missing out on a 500x more than Experiencing one position go down 99% Missing out on $500 > Losing $1 Since the name of the game is to attract Projects with $1bn FDV potential Then the success metric should not be The number of projects that successfully launch It should be The number of projects that exceed $50m FDV During the Dec 24-Jan 25 Virtuals wave 5 projects exceeded $100m FDV; AIXBT, GAME, LUNA, VADER, AIXCB 3 more exceeded $50m FDV; SEKOIA, ACOLYT, TAOCAT Fast forward today; TIBBIR exceeded $100m FDV And will likely flip AIXBT eventually as TIBBIR is a very strong cult coin whose holder base is completely out of touch with reality (they're gonna hate me for this but I think this is what makes TIBBIR bullish) IRIS exceeded $100m FDV at launch day But we haven’t heard much from the team since then (which frankly disappointed me) And the price action followed the lack of communication/leadership MAMO and AXR exceeded $50m FDV MAMO will likely remain above $50m FDV given extremely low float, legit product/team and close CB ties And AXR is currently the best performing project out of Genesis so far (surpassing BIOS and IRIS recently) SOLACE and BIOS hit $40m FDV but were down bad last week Looking at other projects, most of them are stuck at FDVs below $5m So what is the missing piece? Why aren’t $1bn potential teams launching on Virtuals? Lets look at the evolution of Virtuals' launchpad Virtuals Launchpad V1 was a pumpdotfun fork for agents The main BUILDER problems with V1 were 1️⃣ Limited marketing support from Virtuals 2️⃣ Snipers buying at ~$50k FDV (instead of Virgens) 3️⃣ $12k required to buy 50% of your token supply 4️⃣ Lack of funding to cover operational expenses Fast forward to Genesis 4 months later, most of these problems are solved 1️⃣ Kaito yapping + virality from wildly successful Genesis ROIs 2️⃣ Diamond hand Virgens buying at $200k FDV, snipers buying at >$4m FDV 3️⃣ $200 required to buy 50% (if the raise is successful) Except for one... FUNDRAISING Teams give 50% of their token supply Leverage the marketing, community and all other valuable ecosystem benefits Virtuals provide But don’t raise a penny in exchange Sharing trading fees with builders is GREAT But volume during a bear is typically low Still could be sufficient for many teams if combined with token liquidations for treasury building Yet there are some options to solve the fundraising problem upfront to give more certainty for teams But this usually comes with TRADEOFFS One tradeoff is bad actors can abuse this Remember a dev that defined raised funds as “guaranteed profits” So ideally Virtuals should monitor teams and distribute funds raised on a milestone-based basis rather than distributing it all in one go Another big tradeoff is that it will push up the entry FDVs for Virgens And thus potentially lower ROIs When the raise is at $1m FDV instead of $200k FDV $1bn is not a 5000x anymore (it is a 1000x) But on the other hand, your allocation is higher So instead of turning $20 into $100k You are now turning $100 into $100k Changing the entry FDV might open pandora's box As projects will try to negotiate the entry FDVs But despite all the tradeoffs, if providing upfront fundraising Could attract $1bn potential teams It is worth taking the risk Post inspired by a quick convo with @Defi0xJeff in SG CAP STAYS ON 🧢