This proposal aims to obtain a marketing budget of US$1 million to support Harbour Industrial Capital in raising a second Polkadot Ecosystem Fund, with a target size of US$100 million. The primary means of spending this marketing budget will be through sponsorship of approximately 20 Family Office summits/ traditional investment conferences, where we see the greatest opportunity for untapped capital.
THE BELOW IS JUST A SUMMARY.
TO READ THE FULL PROPOSAL, PLEASE CLICK HERE.
UPDATE 10 MAY: UPON REQUEST FROM SEVERAL REVIEWERS, WE HAVE ADDED A MORE DETAILED BUDGET IN THE TABLE BELOW. THERE HAVE BEEN NO CHANGES TO THE OVERALL BUDGET, IT JUST PROVIDES A MORE DETAILED BREAKDOWN OF COSTS.
Proof of Work: Who we are and what we have done so far
Why We Need a New Large Polkadot Fund
The unfortunate answer is: Because many traditional VCs still ignore projects building on Polkadot. Ask any team that recently tried to raise money from generic crypto VCs, a frequent reply is “You’ve got a good team and good idea, but why are you building on Polkadot?”. Sure, we believe this narrative will change over time as other capital allocators slowly begin to realise the potential of Polkadot. But in the meanwhile, we need a dedicated Polkadot-only VC, that helps all the exciting new projects building on Polkadot get off the ground.
It is a chicken-and-egg problem: If Polkadot based projects are starved of capital vis-a-vie those building in other ecosystems, Polkadot will never get the liquidity and “hype” that ultimately attracts more capital. Having worked in the ecosystem for many years, it’s sad to see quality Polkadot based projects migrate to other L1s/L2s, not because of the tech, but simply because they believe they have better opportunities to get VC funding there. We want to change that, and make Polkadot the place great builders go and access capital.
Why Harbour Industrial Capital?
Harbour Industrial Capital (HIC) is a private Polkadot VC fund, established by Max Rebol and Mario Altenburger in 2021. We are registered in the Cayman Islands and headquartered in HK. As of Q1 2024 we have an AUM of over US$10 million. We have raised this money from private investors such as Family Offices, and subsequently deployed it exclusively in the Polkadot ecosystem. Fund 1 held its final closing on 31 December 2023, and we are about three quarters deployed. The plan is to launch Fund 2 towards the end of 2024, with a target size of US$ 100 million.
Investment Strategy Harbour Industrial Capital aims to achieve the following four interrelated objectives:
Family Offices as LPs
Target LPs will primarily be institutional investors such as Family Offices (FOs) But why promote a Polkadot Ecosystem Development Fund, when people can just invest directly into Polkadot? There are at least three good reasons:
Budget
Please find our proposed budget in the table below. Kindly note that this is still a draft, as the cost of many items are yet to be confirmed. Most importantly, the exact sponsorship fee will vary from event to event, and has to be negotiated with each event organiser. The numbers below are averages based on initial discussions we have had with different organisers. We have applied a discount of 50% for sponsoring an entire events series (rather than a one-off event), as all organisers prefer long-term partnerships and encourage them with such discounts. It is also the primary reason why we have decided to do this treasury proposal rather than go through the Events Bounty, which only supports one-off events.
Please also note that the amount between line items in this table may shift, depending on actual costs, so long as the total of $1m is not exceeded. A key variable in this budget is the number of events we will organise. We propose 20 events throughout the fundraising period of two years. However, it may end up being 15 or 25, depending on the actual costs of the initial events.
This means, we will continue organising the fundraising events, until this budget is used up. We believe that this approach is well aligned with the interests of the treasury: The more events we are able to organise, the more commitments into the fund we are likely to get, and the more capital we will have available to invest back into the Polkadot ecosystem.
Continue Reading
The above is just the short summary. To read the proposal in full, including graphics and additional links please click here.
Threshold
Hello from Polkadotters!
Bringing attention to family funds via sponsoring their summits sounds like a pretty interesting idea. The proposal itself is very well structured and detailed, and the explanation at AAG was decent, so we feel that Max and Mario will bring value to the ecosystem. I think we are not the only ones who want “more Scytales to support more Mythicals”.
But, can you provide a proper budget breakdown? For a big spender, it seems to be quite vague in our opinion.
I hope that with our voting support, the Polkadot ecosystem will continue to thrive, and I hope the you will not let us down.
Hi @Max
I fully respect your contribution to the Polkadot ecosystem, however I believe there should be a clear boundary on what kind of marketing the openGov should fund.
I agree with $1m marketing funding in order to to bring new money to Polkadot, but not in away where it benefits a private entity that will make ~3% a year for the entire life of the fund (and maybe beyond that since it may raise funds in the future from the same investors for other funds) out of their expected $100m AUM.
Using "napkin" math and assuming common VC annual fees of ~3% (both assets & carry) - the VC should make $15m in a course of 5 years (3% x 100m x 5 years), while the treasury gets nothing of it although it was the main contributor to raise those funds. I clearly understand your point that Polkadot will benefit from the new fresh money that will be injected to the ecosystem, but imho it's not enough. The Polkadot treasury/holders should get much more.
It's very common in the VC/hedge fund industry to pay a decent finders fee to the one who helped raise the funds, and here it's missing. The treasury/DOT holders should get a decent cut from the VC annual fees in order to make the deal fair for both sides. If it happens, I'll definitely support it.
Good luck!