Proposal “DIF-ongoing-funding-Nov-Jan“ (Active)Back

Title:DIF ongoing funding Nov-Jan
Owner:TheDIF
Monthly amount: 300 DASH (42514 USD)
Completed payments: 1 totaling in 300 DASH (2 month remaining)
Payment start/end: 2021-11-12 / 2022-02-09 (added on 2021-11-18)
Votes: 807 Yes / 56 No / 49 Abstain
Will be funded: Yes
Manually vote on this proposal (DashCore - Tools - Debugconsole):
gobject vote-many e2e4329e50f7c369c24b70b9c555be1b7b351271ac8a92be27cc85c2263a0781 funding yes

Please login or create a new DashCentral account for comfortable one button voting!

Proposal description

Dear Network,

This proposal is part of two proposals submitted for funding this cycle. 

  • DIF ongoing funding (300 DASH Nov-Jan)
  • DIF suplemental funding (400 DASH Nov only)

Our book keeper has prepared our Q2 balance sheet and profit and loss statement.  Please find these below.  After those statements you can find an update about Q3 and Q4 activities.
https://www.darrentapp.com/DIF/balance_sheet.png

https://www.darrentapp.com/DIF/income-loss.png

The sheets above are through Q2. The equity in ReadyRaider was reported at a different valuation in Q2 because supervisors identified a reporting error early on. The new valuation was the value of the Dash as ReadyRaider received it. This valuation change is only for reporting and should not reflect on ReadyRaider as a business. The closing of Valkyrie's Series A valued the DIFs equity at a multiple. You may notice 2.7 BTC on our balance sheet. This was set aside for the purchase of rune of THORChain. Those purchases began shortly into Q3.

In Q3 the DIF was very active with meetings, however our financial situation was not that eventful. The DIF offered a $50k line of credit to CrayPay secured by Dash and giftcards. The DIF felt the banks could not accurately price the risk of accepting Dash as there is no charge back risk with Dash.  The DIF offered to provide credit at a lower interest rate compared to the banks. CrayPay also made an interest payment (in Dash to the DIF) in Q3. In Q3 the DIF also invested an additional $100k in CrayPay. Two main reasons for this is we learned that CrayPay is even stronger of a business than it was a year ago. We were also pleased with the delivery of DashDirect.

In Q4 we have invested $450k in two companies, we are waiting on the green light from our new partners before we disclose them.

Expenses in general

From our profit and loss statement, you can see the management costs in Q1.  Two of these items are for each of our directors. The smaller item is for the secretary which is a company qualified to house DIF documents. This expense is annual and I expect the DIF will pay for this service again in January.

Please consider funding this proposal. Funding we receive directly effects our strategy. 

--Darren

Show full description ...

Discussion: Should we fund this proposal?

Submit comment
 
1 point,18 days ago
Has the DIF set any funding cap for what they will be holding? I don't think the DIF is anywhere near funded enough yet for that, just wondering if the issue is being discussed yet.
Reply
1 point,17 days ago
We have not set a funding cap for now.

Like you, we also believe the DIF is not anywhere near funded enough. Sometimes people ask why we don't invest in companies like Coinbase or other big names, something that makes a real news splash and moves the needle. The answer is simply that those deals are still far, far beyond our reach. But we'd certainly like to get there.

That would allow us to:

- participate in better and bigger deals
- take more meaningful stakes
- be able to participate in follow-up rounds, which typically require significantly more funds, to prevent getting diluted
- be the lead investor in a deal and take a board seat
- possibly hire professional fund managers so we don't have to rely on the spare time of volunteers

Ultimately this would generate much more impact for the Dash community both from a financial and a PR standpoint.

To do that we need more fire power, probably at least 5-10 times the assets under management (AUM) we have now. It's possible that successful exits will propel us into that league faster than we think and if that happens we will revisit the question of cutting our funding requests. But until then, our plan is to top up our budget little by little every funding cycle.

Sven as DIF Supervisor
Reply
1 point,18 days ago
People should really stop making duplicate budget proposal names, as it messes things up in Dash Central (where a lot of voting takes place).

Due to the incorrect budget proposal (requesting 3 Dash, see dashninja or DMT) and this correct budget proposal (requesting 300 dash) having the same name, it is now impossible to vote on the incorrect budget proposal through Dash Central. I guess the incorrect budget proposal can now only be voted on through DMT or through manual input.
Reply
0 points,18 days ago
See : https://imgur.com/vr4KS9m
Reply
0 points,18 days ago
Please downvote this incorrect multi-month budget proposal with end date 9-2-2022 through DMT or through manual methode, so that it gets removed from the budget proposals list.
Reply
1 point,18 days ago
For clarity : the incorrect multi-month budget proposal is the one requesting 3 dash
Ref : https://www.dashninja.pl/proposaldetails.html?proposalhash=854ed927711028ffd6a18ffe92daff108929a79be1db30ff0b7631ad57f9ba3a
Reply
3 points,19 days ago
Voting NO on this one, or am I....
Reply
0 points,18 days ago
You have my support for this specific budget proposal (and only for this specific budget proposal).
Reply
0 points,18 days ago
Are these two proposals simply to hoover up the loose unclaimed coin for the month? Or was there a mistake?
Reply
0 points,18 days ago
No mistake this time.

Recently, we used to submit monthly proposals relatively late in each budget cycle that were calculated to fill in the gap of unclaimed funds. But submitting late runs the risk of not getting enough votes and it depends on the two supervisors, who typically submit proposals, being available during a short time window, which sometimes can get tricky when our regular lives get in the way. It also isn't costs-efficient since each proposal costs 5 Dash.

So at our last meeting, we decided to switch to a new model. A recurring base proposal for 3 months at 300, which should leave enough room for other proposals judging from recent activity here. Then, each month, we'd look at the remaining available budget and decide if we want to file a supplementary funding request "to hoover up the loose unclaimed coin for the month" as you so eloquently put it. :-) We expect that in some months a supplementary request beyond the 300 base may not be necessary or suitable saving us extra proposals.

In general though, we think it's best for the Dash network to grow the DIF budget rather than letting the funds go unused. While it increases coin supply, it also allows us to participate in better and bigger deals, take more meaningful stakes, perhaps take a board seat at the target company and ultimately generate more impact for the Dash community. We already had cases were we had to decline an attractive investment simply because the minimum check size was beyond our reach.

Finally, it gives you, the MNOs, more choice. Rather than one all-or-nothing proposal, we want to give you more granularity in deciding at what level you'd like to fund the DIF.
Reply