Polkadot Growth Initiative (PGI)
Beneficiary:Dear all,
we shared the Polkadot Growth Initiative (PGI) in the Polkadot forum on the 9th of July, with over 535 views and 31 replies. The post received great input on how to improve the initial PGI concept, which we've incorporated.
From the initial Polkadot forum post to the treasury proposal (Referenda: 1,039) the investment threshold for the PGI was raised from initially 23.33% to 33.33% of the funding target of a raising project, following inputs from the discussion in the Polkadot forum with the community.
The PGI is meant to be a success booster without lowering the threshold for projects to pass the raise.
Ultimately, the PGI’s value proposition is to help fund promising projects coming to Polkadot and increase their probability of success. DOT holders benefit directly through the usage of more blockspace by those teams, and hence increased coretime sales, and indirectly by starting a positive flywheel effect once the first success stories helped by the PGI emerge.
Polkadot Forum Post:
https://forum.polkadot.network/t/polkadot-growth-initiative-pgi/9028
Proposal Document:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1nx-M5QAnqEkCD5d082BrKI3ISn5YjAK4rNAk4WnMhgo/
Update on 5.8.2024:
The PGI will not seek a top up to account for the difference in USD payments.
The PGI is a success booster for Polkadot ecosystem projects to support the ecosystem in the best possible path forward. Project funding and the primary markets are strongly correlated to market movements as is the PGI’s allocation which goes in line with its 10% fixed co-investment in deals reaching the 33% funding target from external investors.
Comments (14)
Proposal Failed
3
of 3Summary
0%
Aye
0%
Nay
Aye (47)0.0 DOT
Support0.0 DOT
Nay (43)0.0 DOT
Comments (14)
Thank you for taking into account feedback from the Forum into your proposal. To be fully honest, how Polimec directly benefits from this co-investment is still not clear to me. As a principle, I would suggest that if you can identify ways that Polimec directly gains from these treasury co-investments, that you redirect those gains back to the teams being supported or back to the treasury itself. The principle being that there should not be incentives for Polimec to spend this DOT other than trying to support a team's success, and not for their own profit. That all being said, it seems this is the kind of program we need in Polkadot, and thus, you have my support.
Full support for this proposal, projects need Polimec, and funding needs diversification of Venture Capitals, having the backup from the treasury for a certain percentage can be a game changer for many teams, and DApps building within Polkadot and the ecosystem around it. LFG PGI!
Thank you for taking into account feedback from the Forum into your proposal. To be fully honest, how Polimec directly benefits from this co-investment is still not clear to me. As a principle, I would suggest that if you can identify ways that Polimec directly gains from these treasury co-investments, that you redirect those gains back to the teams being supported or back to the treasury itself. The principle being that there should not be incentives for Polimec to spend this DOT other than trying to support a team's success, and not for their own profit. That all being said, it seems this is the kind of program we need in Polkadot, and thus, you have my support.