I often share some thoughts on the AI + Crypto sector in my articles. Although my focus is primarily on AI + Crypto, in reality, any competition involving AI is not limited to the crypto ecosystem; it also faces competition from various AI applications in traditional fields. Compared to the crypto ecosystem, the latter has a larger grassroots base and a stronger talent pool.

Recently, a very popular AI project called Concourse has emerged in the traditional finance sector. This project focuses on a very niche area—helping companies process various financial data. It is said that this system can increase the efficiency of financial processing for companies by ten times.

Frankly speaking, compared to the plethora of AI agents in the AI + Crypto sector that are concept-heavy but lack practical utility, I find such AI applications to be much more valuable.

However, what raises my concerns about the current AI + Crypto sector is another piece of data released by this project:

It secured $4.7 million in seed funding from top giants like A16Z and YC.

Note: This $4.7 million is from seed funding, meaning the project raised this amount in its first round of external financing.

This immediately reminds me of the ongoing Genesis Launches by Virtual, allowing for a comparison between the two.

Projects launched on the Genesis Launches platform must allocate 37.5% of their total token supply for presale. What is the amount raised in the presale?

Currently, there are about 40,000 Virtual tokens, and at the current price of Virtual, that amounts to nearly $80,000. For easier calculation, let's round it to $100,000.

By comparing these figures, a question arises:

The financing amounts for projects launched on this platform are not large. If the financing amounts are small, then the complexity of the projects is unlikely to be significant.

I am not saying that more complex projects or larger financing amounts are inherently better, but if a project is too simple and the financing is too low, what can we realistically expect in terms of practicality and functionality?

Compared to Concourse's $4.7 million in funding, $100,000 is indeed too small. What kind of project can be developed with such a small amount? What problems can it solve?

This is a question worth serious consideration.

Let’s think further:

If a project successfully develops through financing on Genesis Launches, it will certainly need to continue raising funds to sustain its progress—$100,000 alone cannot nurture a small seedling into a towering tree.

However, once it seeks further financing, new issues arise:

If it needs to go through round after round of financing, given the current state of venture capital, this project will likely struggle to avoid traditional venture capital, as their overall financial strength and network far exceed those of crypto venture capital.

If it seeks traditional venture capital, what will the project use to raise funds?

Tokens or equity?

If it’s tokens, will traditional venture capital accept them?

I believe there exists a legally ambiguous boundary here. I have written in previous articles: does this token have actual rights? How significant are those rights? If I hold more than 50% of the tokens, can I fully control the project?

This point is currently very unclear. If it’s unclear, will traditional venture capital accept it?

If it’s equity, then what about the tokens that have already been issued? How do tokens and equity relate? What are the differences in rights?

This point is also very unclear. If it’s unclear, it could easily lead to disputes in the future.

Let’s take a step back. Suppose this project is fortunate enough not to need traditional venture capital and finds a capital-rich giant within the crypto ecosystem. These giants are willing to invest in its tokens according to the default rules of the crypto ecosystem.

This also presents problems:

In recent years, a trend has emerged in the crypto ecosystem: treating VC as a source of amusement, laughing at them for missing selling opportunities due to token lock-ups and suffering the most significant losses.

Many VCs have not only seen no returns from their investments in the crypto ecosystem over the past few years but have also incurred substantial losses. In this context, they have become quite reticent.

In such a situation, would they still be willing to invest in project tokens?

If a project cannot conveniently secure funding from traditional venture capital and fails to attract interest from crypto venture capital, how will it advance its growth in the future?

While it may be easier to initiate financing through crypto ecosystem methods, there are still many pressing issues that need to be resolved for continued financing and sustained progress.

免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。