Joel John

11.5K posts

Joel John banner
Joel John

Joel John

@joeljohn

Writing / Investing - @decentralisedco Walking around - Dubai Early - @nansen_ai,@jarapphq, @usdai_official, @lifiprotocol, @gemxyz (acq'd), @velo_xyz, @0xppl_

Dubai Katılım Aralık 2014
1.3K Takip Edilen17.7K Takipçiler
Sabitlenmiş Tweet
Joel John
Joel John@joeljohn·
Had a little over 75 in-person meetings last week in Singapore. Crypto, in its current stage, rhymes equal parts with an MLM industry and the future of the web. Here is the distilled, TL:DR version of what I learned in Singapore, mixed with photos as is tradition. 1. Why Events There were 700 side events because it's the easiest way for a CMO to justify the job. In-person events are measured with footfall, instead of on-chain value creation (which is harder). Signaling linkages to others in the industry, helps close deals. Most importantly, free food and booze is the oldest trick in the game. They work. If anything, it's a sign of broken incentives in the industry. The current pipeline for capital looks like this: Fund of funds -> VCs -> Founders - > CMOs -> Night clubs. I think it really highlights what's broken with distribution and incentives. Or its globalisation. Not my monkey, not my circus. 2. Token Comps Tokens being down 70-80% on average has a dual sided impact on employee morale. People feel burnt out, and over-worked. Crypto's original promise was exponential upside, for limited risk. Last year's token performance flipped the promise. It's boundless work, for declining upside. For some ecosystems (like SOL), the story is different due to price action (and focus on community). You can see how this variance in comp affects decision making and morale within teams. Some teams, thanks to where the price is, have a disproportionate edge over others. I think there's a loop - where lower prices, lead to worse off decisions, which in turn leads to worse off decisions. 3. VCs, DPIs and tokens Most VC funds are either raising, or set to raise. It makes me wonder where all the idle capital from a few years went back. The alt-coin sell pressure from the past few quarters are likely funds selling off alts that are vested to produce returned capital before raising a new fund. Will they succeed in raising new funds? Yes. Will that new raised funds go to existing tokens or themes? Probably not. I think a lot of VCs are burnt from the past two years and will (i) suppress valuations or (ii) push for earlier liquidity. You can see this play out with consumer app valuations. Few biters. For the VC model to work - you need multiple tokens, listing at high FDVs, with low floats, to mark-up books, and raise new funds (before vests). That pipeline, relies on eigen, berachain, monad - so there's a lot of eyeballs on it. Unlike last cycle, between perps and OTC, that market has evolved too - so its an interesting time for VC overall. 4. All eyes on consumer One of our own portfolio founders added a million users last quarter. Each day, he's adding another 10-15k users. I don't think it will remain the exception. Consumer apps with founders that are non-token first, will likely blitzscale. The same applies to RWA founders with a fintech first focus. As VCs are token oriented and these founders are outsiders, many of them will remain undervalued (and as pariahs). My honest ask to many of them have been to avoid talking to gatekeepers. I think between MPC wallets, L2s and better on-ramps, we are at the cusp of seeing a new generation of consumer apps that have very little t do with existing token economies. Will they be valued as high? Will they create token returns the same way? Probably not. I think they will need a new class of equity first VCs. Or existing ones will flock to equity, and here's the reason why. 5. Exchanges have reduced listing VC backed bags. This is voodoo-hot air theory. But I think regulatory capture will drastically reduce the number of VC backed tokens that make it to large exchanges (like Binance or Coinbase). You can see versions of this if you look at the number of VC backed tokens making it to exchanges and compare to frequency in past cycles. One theory is that retail capital is not flowing in like it once used to and exchanges have no reason to. The other, is that price discovery in exchanges have been down only - and they are being more picky. Whatever be the case, not being able to mark-up books and raise new funds will have trickle down effects on venture valuations. This is why most funds have a preference of lower valuations (risk premia for illiquidity) or SAFTS (assurance that liquidity will come). I think as listings on exchanges get harder, we will see capital flow through to equity. 6. On token management. A lot of founders seem to be issuing tokens as that is what VCs are backing today. But the same guys will vanish once your FDV is around your series A valuations. If you are a founder - consider hard and strong about issuing tokens. If you do issue a liquid token, IR (or educating markets) about what you do is as important as running the product. There's space emerging for new forms of media that highlights key metrics, and earnings for protocols. This subsection of the market is small today - but as nature of investors focused on liquid markets trend to sophistication and number of tokens that are at low valuations increase, I see more capital flowing towards this segment. 7. The Early adopter-gatekeeper See all these packed events? Talk to most folks attending them, and you'll realise everyone has a clear agenda. Most of the time, its money. Loads of it. And that's fine, its a capitalist economy after all. The problem, is when a subsection has made tremendous wealth by being early and packages the same old thing in new words and continues to do the same things. We somehow presume everything needs a token. Everything needs to be overly complicated. Everything needs millions in burn. The early adopters are rich and can afford to be stupid for years on length. New guys (post 2022 entrants) that haven't made bank, have to lean on efficiency. But in pursuit of efficiency, they seek advice from early adopters, and get lessons on a constant grift. I think this is why our industry struggles to evolve. It rhymes with MLM schemes, because they work the same way. An early adopter wins by virtue of being early. As new entrants arrive, the early adopter continues to win. With each new participant, the amount of return declines. Sooner or later, you will have a desperate large bottom pyramid. If you are in the industry, it helps to wonder - are you desperate, or leading. Are you being efficient, or consuming junk. Just lots of room for introspection there. The way these systems break is when a new entrant ignores the rules and builds a business to scale ignoring the incumbents. My thoughts, prayers and dollars can be behind you if that's you. 8. DePin Data This is specific to data points (like audio, spacial data, map data etc). I think a lot of these will rhyme with P2E as it gives retail a chance to enter the industry and can be packaged like a dream. Spend $50 to make $100 is an easy sell. My concern here is how valuable is this data? My running assumption is valuation fr such data will be at 1000x what they are actually worth. They will be great trades (and worth playing on liquid side) - but the long-tail of data accumulators will be in for a rude awakening. Much of that sector rhymes with gaming guilds at this point. I know this is a sceptical take, but I'm putting it out there for healthy discourse on the value of the data. Some of it will be tremendously valuable, and much of it will be useless. Kind of like the long-tail of BS. Which leads me to my final point. 9. The Long-tail of BS. Every category initially has few players that are pioneers. They attract high valuations. Which in turn accrues talent building in the same category. If you are imitating a business, you are likely in the long-tail of BS category. It works if you have niche or geo-specific moats, but odds are quite low you have those moats. This applies to service providers (like lawyers) as much as it applies to product categories (like GambleFi or Web3 social). The long-tail of BS happens because there's more VCs than thoughtful builders in the room. The long-tail of BS cannot be avoided. It is a thing. It is a beast to be acknowledged. As the industry grows, the long-tail of BS will grow even longer. You can see it in the booths with no product. In the events with no conversations. In the KOL rounds with financial shenanigans. In the gigantic face of a founder with no product slapped on an event entrance. The long tail of BS is everywhere. I think it can't be tamed. It can't be cut. It only has to be acknowledged and waded through. The reason why the long-tail of BS exists (currently) is because founders (and talent) that can meaningfully produce impact are likely in other sectors (like AI). Even funds that deploy at scale, see this tday. There is an evident decline in the quality of individuals. But this is what retail adoption looks like. As the sector scales - it brings with it everything that society is. The good, the bad, the ugly - and well, even FTX. You just need to grow smarter as the long-tail of BS takes over. A lot of the systemic challenges (and opportunities) that exist in crypto are dependent on price. As the fed cuts rates, much of what I said will change. We are quite probably at the early stages of a new cycle. I am not as bearish - but there's a healthy amount of skeptical cynicism in me. We have work to do.
Joel John tweet mediaJoel John tweet mediaJoel John tweet mediaJoel John tweet media
English
40
37
404
67.8K
Joel John
Joel John@joeljohn·
idk why/how exactly but my interest in long walls of un-optimised, boring text has skyrocketed the past few weeks research papers from the early 2000s, sec-filings and books have never seemed so interesting to me probably having the opposite of ai psychosis literary euphoria
English
0
0
2
31
Atomist 🏰
Atomist 🏰@0xAtomist·
I have just spent the last 14 days fighting with the @Wise support team to move company funds between bank accounts we own. Wise built its reputation on promises of cheaper, faster, more transparent money transfers, breaking down the barriers of borders. Our capital was held. Over naming conventions in the reference field. After explaining the source of funds, the nature of the payment, and the direction of the reference in writing multiple times, they cancelled the transfer and returned the funds 10 days later. To make matters worse, they then froze my card mid-dispute. All without notification and with no formal response to my messages. At the time, I was in Thailand, where I needed my borderless bank account the most, where card infrastructure is limited. I had to cover two weeks of business expenses from personal funds while the business account sat locked. In that time, our subscriptions started failing. Slack. Claude. DefiLlama. The X API. The tools we use to run our async operations, manage every client campaign, and ensure the due diligence of our research pipeline. Not because we didn't have the money. Because we couldn't access it. Whilst I am pretty pissed off with Wise, this is not only a Wise problem. This is a rails problem. Every fintech built on correspondent banking inherits the same assumption: your money is permitted until it isn't. A better interface does not change who has the final say. We should not need reminding of this. But sometimes we do. What we are building here is the alternative. Financial infrastructure operating in parallel: settling payments with no correspondent bank in the middle, holding assets in self-custody where no support ticket can touch them, and running rails with no compliance department between you and your money. That is why we are here. That is why this is worth building. That is why we show up every day despite the difficulties of this industry. We aren't going anywhere. P.S. I have a complaint logged. It will take 15 business days to receive a response. Obviously.
English
12
5
19
2.6K
Paul Hsu
Paul Hsu@paulhsu·
Unbreaking bad habits is often harder than sandboxing around great habits.
English
2
0
1
43
Joel John
Joel John@joeljohn·
@thorstenball this tweet reads like a priest looking at the temples in ancient rome and thinking there will be no stone left unturned. (you're right though)
English
1
0
2
1.5K
Thorsten Ball
Thorsten Ball@thorstenball·
Lately, whenever I open this app and see the latest tricks, and hacks, and notes, and workflows, and spec here and skill there, I can't help but think: All of this will be washed away by the models. Every Markdown file that's precious to you right now will be gone.
English
94
41
756
86.7K
Joel John
Joel John@joeljohn·
@zariat so should i sell those nfts u've been shilling or no?
English
1
0
1
64
sysls
sysls@systematicls·
@joeljohn @mhdempsey This is honestly a great share. Thanks for your time. Btw its funny you say this, arent you an investor
English
1
0
1
151
sysls
sysls@systematicls·
One of the things that annoys me about some new entrepreneurs is that they don’t carry about a passion for the problem they’re trying to solve. It’s almost this disease where they’ll do anything to get funding. Like change their entire product or idea on a whim if that means that’ll get them funded. Obviously then, their goal here is that they want to be a “entrepreneur/founder” more than they want to bring their idea into life. Because if they are willing to abandon their idea at the first point of friction they must not be very passionate about it. Imo, building anything from 0 to 1 is so egregiously difficult that unless you’re willing to chew glass for it, the chances of you being able to generate enough escape velocity to be relevant is almost 0. Be passionate. It’s an endlessly renewable source of fuel.
English
14
10
108
7.5K
Mr. Purple
Mr. Purple@MrPurple_DJ·
I'm building something like this, have some ideas to mitigate founder issues. One piece that hasn't been stated is that enabling short positions on private companies earns the share lenders premiums. This can benefit founders and other early employees while their typical start up salary is comparatively lower. Compliance requires holders to be accredited investors, but that is a solvable problem. Critical piece is robust liquidity/demand for secondary/derivative interest to enable the market, low liquidity would clearly increase volatility. DMs open if you want to chat.
English
1
0
0
36
Joel John
Joel John@joeljohn·
I think any startup valued over 100 million should have an hip-3 perp so esops, VCs and third party vendors can hedge exposure. On the short run it leads to volatility. On the long run it sets better floor and outcomes for all involved. DMs open if you’re building this
English
6
1
34
6.4K
Joel John
Joel John@joeljohn·
actually we've been riffing on telegram lol his view is that liquidity is not always a feature in all instances and in crypto that challenge gets amplified because you can bring layers of financialisation into it via mm/hedge funds my view is that markets will punish liquidity being abused over time and reprice things efficiently (metadao startups, perps on l2s) but whats missing in my argument is that startups are not just financial units, they are also emotionally demanding journeys and financialisation gives a fairly tempting exit route for founders that may have otherwise stuck around and built great things and when you look at the data.. there is anecdotal evidence for it. i think my $100mil number is unfair - it should be at $1bil fwiw. I'll do some digging around here
English
0
0
2
140
Larry Fink Jr
Larry Fink Jr@larryfink_jr·
@0xngmi @joeljohn i agree with joel - the scammers are going to find a way to scam either way. a fast scam is healthier than slow scam
English
1
0
0
148
Joel John
Joel John@joeljohn·
@0xcryptus @0xngmi actually isn't - HIP-3 is permissionless. Retail gets to short alongside everyone else.
English
0
0
1
73
cryptus
cryptus@0xcryptus·
@joeljohn @0xngmi the hedge you describe is a vehicle for insiders to fleece retail with less accountability
English
1
0
0
66
cryptus
cryptus@0xcryptus·
@joeljohn @0xngmi i am not sure how anyone who has seen the impact of premarket perps could think this would lead to better long term outcomes
English
1
0
1
95
Joel John
Joel John@joeljohn·
@0xngmi I’d take that over founder wasting everyone’s time and cashing out in chunks.
English
1
0
3
570
0xngmi
0xngmi@0xngmi·
@joeljohn 1. be a startup founder 2. startup raises at a high val 3. have huge exposure 4. hedge by shorting perp on hip3 5. now founder is incentivized to crash the company + already cashed out so no incentive to keep grinding
English
5
0
102
4.3K
Joel John
Joel John@joeljohn·
the things that make a draft imperfect are ironically the things that keep it human i think that rhymes with life
English
0
0
10
401
Joel John
Joel John@joeljohn·
@0xluude one of them is a primary avenue for price discovery for real-world assets on weekend in the middle of global scale conflict.
English
0
0
1
104
DhruvBodani.eth
DhruvBodani.eth@dhruvbodani·
@joeljohn @xenowits > The underwriting part of it worries me a bit because the moat is in the humans involved. Yeah that's the entire goal. once you get the underwriting right (and refined) + capital to underwrite risks, it's a boring but cashflow positive business
English
1
0
0
40
Joel John
Joel John@joeljohn·
Things I'm excited by in crypto rn - Hyperliquid, fringe fintech primitives on Solana, RWAs that are scaling (maple, cfg, ondo), zk native financial apps, fintech primitives built on these rails Trying to put more focus on these vs random foundation essays and vanity pieces.
English
15
1
95
8.1K