Solace by Virtuals price

Virgens, are you paying attention to Prototype token launches on @virtuals_io or only Genesis? IMO, Prototype launches feels more like traditional PF launches and way more degen, but there could be some hidden gems launching that you could get into at super low entry points 👀 I think it is highly likely we could see some winners launch on the Prototype agent page NFA, but the one looking promising currently is $EMMA Based on the project details, I could see $EMMA being integrated into a Mental Health ACP with the likes of SOLACE, so I personally have put a little in for the gamble in case it does graduate and turn into something. Again, NFA as these Prototype launches and rug and go to zero quickly, but it feels like it's also worth keeping an eye on these for the rare occasion we get a winner graduating from here! If you are interested in doing more research on $EMMA, here is the project page to DYOR: What do you think fam? Are you looking at the Prototype agents for hidden gems?

If Virtuals is the new angel investment 1. @virtuals_io Genesis Launch has proven to be work for small teams, like @niyoko_agent @BasisOS @AIxVC_Axelrod 2. If you want to attract projects with FDV potential to 1bn - 100bn, you need to know, what do they need? A Story from @Jason : Jason is Uber's third angel investor, having invested $25,000 in 2010 at a valuation of $4 million, and holds it for nearly 50,000 times today Is Kalanick missing the $25,000? At that time, he had already sold a company and was doing angel investing himself. He is interested in Jason's media resources and super connections: - Jason's tech Newsletter Inside had 300,000 subscribers, covering basically all of the venture capital community at the time - How well-connected is Jason? When he started his business, he attracted the wife of USV founder Fred Wilson to be his partner; When Musk was about to buy Twitter for $44 billion, Jason asked his friends to contribute $250,000 each to support Musk Jason has also written his experience into a book, Angel: How to Invest in Technology Startups An example of the Crypto space: Last year, @calilyliu invited @DrPayFi @humafinance to switch from the EVM ecosystem to the Solana ecosystem, providing assistance including: - Created the PayFi narrative and Huma Finance's influence on the PayFi track - Introduction to LPs and various upstream and downstream resources - …… @DrPayFi and @0xErbil are both Web2 star entrepreneurs. Richard sold the company to Facebook, Erbil was a judge for the Peter Thiel Scholarship (Vitalik was one of the interviewers!). ） Are they short of money and VC? The angel round, I remember, was valued at $40 million But Lily Liu and the Solana Foundation can give them a Crypto Playbook, which is a very valuable help for them To get back to business, if Virtuals wants to attract projects with the potential to reach 1bn and invest $100,000 (42k $Virtual) in angel investment at a valuation of $5 million, what are these projects looking for in Virtuals? Welcome to discuss

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 🧢

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 🧢

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 🧢