Scan to download
BTC $77,205.30 +3.32%
ETH $2,411.21 +3.77%
BNB $648.16 +3.19%
XRP $1.47 +2.70%
SOL $88.42 +0.88%
TRX $0.3267 +0.49%
DOGE $0.0987 +1.56%
ADA $0.2579 +1.95%
BCH $454.51 +1.30%
LINK $9.59 +2.54%
HYPE $45.06 +3.78%
AAVE $115.25 +2.76%
SUI $1.00 +2.23%
XLM $0.1742 +5.46%
ZEC $338.53 +2.05%
BTC $77,205.30 +3.32%
ETH $2,411.21 +3.77%
BNB $648.16 +3.19%
XRP $1.47 +2.70%
SOL $88.42 +0.88%
TRX $0.3267 +0.49%
DOGE $0.0987 +1.56%
ADA $0.2579 +1.95%
BCH $454.51 +1.30%
LINK $9.59 +2.54%
HYPE $45.06 +3.78%
AAVE $115.25 +2.76%
SUI $1.00 +2.23%
XLM $0.1742 +5.46%
ZEC $338.53 +2.05%

investment

Varys Capital's venture capital director: There may be fewer than 20 VCs in the industry that are truly still making seed round investments

Varys Capital's head of venture capital, Tom Dunleavy, posted on X that the financing environment in the cryptocurrency market has changed dramatically over the past six months. Previously, VCs had to constantly network, write content, appear on podcasts, participate in Spaces, promote their investment logic, and make countless calls every week to invest in good projects... But now, as long as there is money to spend, that's enough. Current projects are being "pushed in front of VCs," without VCs having to actively dig for them; as long as others know you have funds, projects will come knocking.Most VC firms are now in one of the following three states: they are out of money, they are shifting to later stages (Series A and beyond), or they are fundraising (but not smoothly). Fundraising that used to take 2-3 weeks now often drags on for 2-3 months. Projects with questionable business models or those that simply replicate the latest hot narratives can no longer secure new funding or follow-on investments (which is a good thing).Currently, there may be fewer than 20 firms that are still making pre-seed/seed investments. VCs can basically choose the projects they want to invest in at their leisure and have more time to conduct due diligence. The investment cycle in 2025 and 2026 is likely to become a historically significant "golden opportunity," but the premise is that VCs can hold on.

The founder of Hyperliquid once rejected a $1 billion valuation funding proposal, insisting on a "zero external investment" approach

According to market news, Hyperliquid founder Jeffrey Yan received an investment intention based on a valuation of about $1 billion and a scale of about $100 million less than a year after the project went live. However, after careful consideration, he ultimately chose to reject the investment terms.Reports indicate that before and after the financing proposal was made, the team had been continuously using personal funds to maintain operations, consuming the founder's personal finances each month to cover project costs. During the investor's engagement, Jeff communicated with several entrepreneurs and VCs about the nature and significance of financing, but he was never convinced that external capital could enhance its intrinsic value. Ultimately, he clearly informed the team on Monday that he would reject the financing proposal.Relevant insiders described that the team members managing funds were shocked by this decision, as several preparations had already been made around the financing. Jeff's core reason was that Hyperliquid is not a traditional company but an on-chain protocol that needs to maintain neutrality. He believed that once external equity capital was introduced, it could undermine the protocol's permissionless and neutral positioning, conflicting with its long-term design goals.He had previously stated that if Bitcoin had accepted VC financing in its early days, its neutrality narrative might have been weakened. Following the same logic, he chose to continue maintaining Hyperliquid's investor-free structure and to support part of the operating expenses with personal funds in the long term. On January 28, 2024, he summarized the project's principles on social media: · No investors · No paid market makers · No fees charged to the development team (or the development team does not take fees) · No insiders (or internal privileged participants). This statement is also seen as a core footnote to Hyperliquid's extreme decentralization/decapitalization approach.

Bittensor co-founder responds to Covenant AI's accusations: no authority to suspend subnet emissions, and the amount sold is less than 1% of the investment

Bittensor co-founder Const (@const_reborn) responded on Twitter to recent allegations regarding Covenant AI. Const stated that he has no authority to pause emissions, and that the previous sale of a portion of alpha positions in three subnetworks was because these subnetworks were not operational and were in a high ratio of code destruction state. The impact of this transaction on emissions is consistent with the buying and selling behavior of ordinary TAO holders, and he does not enjoy any special privileges.Regarding management authority, Const clarified that it was Samuel himself who abandoned his Discord channel, and he did not remove his administrator role; he only temporarily restricted his ability to delete posts that honestly criticize and then restored it. Additionally, he emphasized that the scale of the token sell-off was less than 1% of his total investment in the team, and stated that exercising the rights to buy and sell tokens under the dTao system is fundamental to supporting the operation of the system.According to previous reports from ChainCatcher, the main subnetwork developer on Bittensor, Covenant AI, announced its withdrawal from Bittensor. Covenant AI founder Sam Dare stated that the reason Bittensor attracts builders, miners, validators, and investors into this ecosystem is because of its promise not to be controlled by any single entity. But this promise is a lie.
app_icon
ChainCatcher Building the Web3 world with innovations.