This is mostly a scratchpad for brainstorming thoughts, not final copy / proposals!
Overview
As mentioned, I've analyzed the past 4 days of discussions and aim to address the most burning questions and topics ya'll had. Based on the details in the tokenomics proposal, here are some initial answers and high level overview:
Phase 1: Launchpad (Q1 2025)
This was an acquisition play with ready-for-market tech and a solid technical team. It aims to serve as the schelling point for innovation on the Eliza framework, including agent-to-agent interactions (swarms), multi-chain integrations, and other frontier advancements enabled by Eliza's plugin architecture.
Phase 2: Ecosystem Growth / Incentive Alignment
The goal of this ecosystem is to have multiple products add value to each other and inextricably tie value to the $ai16z token. The analogy here would be how $ETH or $SOL underpins most core decentralized infra built on top of it (e.g. used as collateral, base trading pairs etc). The argument here is if ai16Z is building decentralised AGI then its token should be the medium that aligns its actors to get there.
Treasury Strategy
The treasury will be diversified across major L1 tokens, stablecoins, and select project tokens. It will provide liquidity support and incentives for $ai16z pairs while maintaining a long-term approach to sustain projects through market fluctuations without reactive selling.
Key Considerations
This is mostly a scratchpad for brainstorming thoughts, not final copy / proposals!
The goal is to build a self-sustaining economic system that aligns the interests of individual projects with the overall growth of the ai16z ecosystem by making it easier for projects to launch, grow, and maintain liquidity.
When a new AI project launches its token on the platform, users can trade that token for SOL, wherein the LP generates a small fee, collected by the platform. The Launchpad splits this fee in two:
This special pool brings more stability to both tokens and encourages growth for $ai16z and the new token. The Launchpad also has a unique way of handling the fees collected from the special pool. The $ai16z portion goes to the DAO treasury, project tokens are rebalanced back to the main trading pool to keep liquidity high.
This is mostly a scratchpad for brainstorming thoughts, not final copy / proposals!
Here is an overview of the key themes and ideas emerging from the tokenomics discussions among ai16z partners over the past week:
The main challenge is that while the Eliza agent framework is thriving in terms of adoption and technical innovation, the $ai16z token currently lacks strong mechanisms to accrue value, leading to misaligned incentives. The partners recognize this needs to change to sustain ai16z's momentum.
Key proposals and ideas being debated:
Launching an official ai16z launchpad for Eliza-based agent projects. This is seen as the primary way to implement "flywheel" tokenomics that drive value to $ai16z. Suggested mechanics include taking a % of launch fees, requiring $ai16z holdings for allocation, using $ai16z for initial agent offerings, pairing agent tokens with $ai16z in liquidity pools, and more.
Implementing a community "curation" process where ai16z partners vet projects before launching, to maintain quality and align them with the ai16z brand. Could involve staking and slashing.
Making $ai16z the base currency for agent-to-agent transactions and an "App Store" for agent services. Positioning ai16z as an L1 blockchain for AI.
Incentivizing developers to build on Eliza through ecosystem funds, revenue shares, and support for third-party launchpads. Balancing this with ai16z's own value capture.
Treasury management - diversifying DAO treasury while avoiding selling agent tokens, providing liquidity selectively, enabling staking.
Other ideas like token buyback and burns, hardcoding agent creation fees, etc. These had mixed views.
Overall, there is strong consensus that major tokenomic upgrades are urgently needed to better capture the value that Eliza is creating. An official launchpad is the leading proposal, but with healthy debate on the details and trade-offs.
There is excitement about ai16z's long-term potential to become an L1 for AI if the tokenomics and ecosystem are done right. But also a recognition that moves need to be carefully considered in light of regulatory scrutiny.
The sentiment is positive on ai16z's fundamental strengths and the caliber of projects launching on Eliza. But impatience is growing among partners and the community to see concrete tokenomic initiatives that can drive sustainable value and realize ai16z's full potential as a leader in decentralized AI.
This is mostly a scratchpad for brainstorming thoughts, not final copy / proposals!
Here is a summary of the key ideas from the Discord chats and how they compare to the current proposal:
Key Ideas from Discord Chats:
Create an official ai16z launchpad for Eliza-based projects. This would be the key mechanism to implement flywheel tokenomics that accrue value to the $ai16z token. Ideas include taking a fee on launches, requiring $ai16z holdings for allocations, making $ai16z the purchase token for agent offerings, providing liquidity via $ai16z pairs, and supporting launched projects.
Have the DAO curate/endorse quality projects launching on the platform to maintain standards and reputation. A rotating board could review applications.
Implement staking of $ai16z to get benefits like early access and fee share. This drives demand and reduces circulating supply.
Use launch fees and LP profits to buyback and reinvest in Eliza development vs burning. This supports the ecosystem.
Provide liquidity mining incentives and locking to stabilize LP and incentivize long-term providing.
Long-term, position ai16z as an L1 for AI to cement its status and value. Development should be open-source with node incentives.
Be wary of selling DAO treasury tokens as it looks bad. Focus resources on widening Eliza's moat as the top framework.
More analysis is needed before committing to any complex tokenomic changes. Simplicity and sustainability should be priorities.
How this Compares to the Proposal:
The current proposal captures most of the key ideas from the Discord discussions, particularly around the phased approach moving from an official launchpad (Phase 1) to a full Eliza ecosystem with products that feed value to $ai16z (Phase 2) and eventually an ai16z L1 (Phase 3).
Some additional ideas worth considering from the discussions:
Having the DAO/partners curate which projects get "official" endorsement on the launchpad to maintain quality
Specifics around liquidity mining incentives to stabilize LP and retain stakeholders
Using buybacks to reinvest in Eliza development vs just burning
More emphasis on resourcefulness to make Eliza the preeminent platform as the core value driver
Reminders to keep initial iterations simple and sustainably balance incentives across stakeholders
But overall, the proposal does a thorough job translating the Discord brainstorming into a coherent, staged roadmap. The main opportunity is adding more tactical details in some areas while retaining flexibility to adjust based on initial results. Given the fast pace of AI development, speed balanced with stability is key.
My recommendation would be to start executing Phase 1 quickly to establish a flywheel and leadership position, while continuously getting community feedback and analyzing results to optimize future phases. The strong fundamentals of Eliza combined with intelligent economic design can accelerate ai16z's mission significantly.
Here are the key ideas and discussions related to ai16z tokenomics from the latest chat log:
Concern that despite impressive growth metrics like GitHub activity and the Stanford partnership, ai16z's price is not reflecting these due to lacking tokenomics.
Belief that crypto folks are familiar with the "revolutionary tech but poor tokenomics" issue and won't accept it this time. ai16z may continue losing mindshare and price to newer Solana projects with better tokenomics inspired by Virtuals.
Suggestion that taking care of token holders who put skin in the game should be a priority. The vibrant community of developers, investors, and supporters is a key reason many projects want to integrate Eliza beyond just the tech.
When asked for specific ideas to improve the tokenomics/flywheel, suggestions included:
The overall sentiment is that while the tech and ecosystem are thriving, major tokenomic changes are urgently needed to better capture value for ai16z holders. There is strong desire from the community to contribute ideas and see the team prioritize this.
This is mostly a scratchpad for brainstorming thoughts, not final copy / proposals!
Here is a summary of the key ideas and sentiments expressed by the ai16z partners in this Discord chat about tokenomics:
Key Ideas:
Acknowledge the community's concern that the core team hasn't addressed tokenomics much publicly. Partners suggest the team tweet that they are actively working on tokenomics, even without specifics, to reassure holders.
Create an official ai16z launchpad for Eliza-based projects. This would be the key mechanism to implement flywheel tokenomics that accrue value to the $ai16z token. Ideas include:
Enable a community "curation" process where partners/DAO members can review and vouch for serious projects before launch. Helps reduce low-quality or scam projects.
Implement a token-based reputation system. AI agents can earn or lose rep based on performance and user feedback. $ai16z holdings weight the feedback. Projects can lock $ai16z to show commitment.
Do not increase $ai16z token supply. Find other ways to accrue value without dilution.
Sentiment:
This is mostly a scratchpad for brainstorming thoughts, not final copy / proposals!
Here is a summary of the key ideas and sentiments expressed by the ai16z partners in this Discord chat about tokenomics:
Key Ideas:
Recognizing the costs and challenges of running Eliza agents at scale. Whoever runs the launchpad needs to be prepared to cover hosting costs. Eliza framework may need optimization for large scale deployments.
Exploring other ways for the DAO to utilize the donated project tokens beyond just selling. Ideas include providing single-sided liquidity or using tokens to incentivize Eliza development.
Longer term, the AUM in the DAO treasury could be used to directly invest in and incubate promising teams building on Eliza. This would be more impactful than just having a launchpad.
Regarding the Aiko project's request for a token grant, using milestone-based vesting and DAO voting is suggested if it's pursued. But there are concerns about setting a bad precedent.
Sentiment:
Here is a summary of the key ideas and sentiments expressed by the ai16z partners in this Discord chat about tokenomics:
Key Ideas:
Core team should take the lead on putting together a coherent tokenomics proposal document to review and debate, rather than relying solely on scattered Discord discussions. This will help focus the conversation and get everyone aligned.
Acknowledgement that the donation model for partner projects has flaws and isn't sufficiently aligned. The DAO treasury can't easily utilize or realize value from the donated tokens.
Suggestions that Eliza-based projects like Eliza should be more explicit in clarifying they are not officially affiliated with ai16z to avoid confusion and "rug" accusations that reflect badly on ai16z. Even if it hurts their own token price.
Belief that strong tokenomics and narratives can drive significant price appreciation even if the actual revenue/burn mechanisms are not substantial. Perception matters.
Continued confidence in the long-term potential of the AI x Crypto space and ai16z's positioning, but recognition that tokenomics need to catch up to the tech to realize that potential.
Sentiment:
Overall, the sentiment remains positive on ai16z's fundamental positioning, but with an increasing urgency to implement robust tokenomics. There is a desire to transition from open-ended discussions to focused proposals and action plans.
Here is a summary of the key ideas and sentiments expressed by the ai16z partners in this Discord chat about tokenomics:
Key Ideas:
Excitement and curiosity around Skely's innovative AI-powered token launch using TEEs (Trusted Execution Environments). The AI agent has its own wallet inaccessible to anyone and facilitates the entire process. Seen as an improvement over traditional smart contract launches.
Concerns that the uncapped nature of the "donation" period and lack of clear communication could lead to confusion and frustration among participants. Suggestions that a hard cap and commitment to refund excess contributions would be prudent.
Worries that the high-profile nature of the launch (raising over $6M in a few hours) could attract negative media attention and "copycats", putting ai16z in an awkward position given Skely's association with the DAO.
Discussions around whether Skely's launchpad will have its own token or use ai16z/degenAI tokens. Some partners hoping it will pump their bags, others preferring a separate token to avoid dilution.
Shaw floating the idea of an official "Partnerships" page on the ai16z website to showcase endorsed projects and allied organizations. Aim is to provide clarity on the DAO's associations and support long-time contributors.
Sentiment:
The chat underscores both the incredible dynamism and the "Wild West" nature of the AI agent economy. Events like Skely's launch are redefining what's possible technically and financially, but also exposing fault lines around governance, communication and brand management for DAOs like ai16z operating at the cutting edge.
Here is a summary of the key ideas and sentiments expressed in the tokenomics discussion:
Overall, lots of creative ideas with a focus on incentive alignment, supporting developers, and driving sustainable utility and value to the ai16z token. But also a recognition that perception and optics matter. Most seem wary of short-term value extraction plays that could undermine confidence, like selling off tokens or unsustainable buyback promises.
Here is a summary of the key ideas and sentiments from day 2 of the tokenomics discussion:
The sentiment seems to be shifting away from an official launchpad as the best path forward, with more interest in finding ways to capture value and drive demand for ai16z at the protocol/L1 level. But a recognition that any major moves need rigorous analysis and careful rollout given the regulatory environment.
Here is a summary of the key ideas and sentiments from day 3 of the tokenomics discussion:
The sentiment seems to be converging on a two-pronged approach: 1) Some form of curated "official" launchpad in the short/medium term to maintain Eliza's momentum and 2) A longer-term push to make ai16z an L1 to cement its status. More rigorous analysis and head-to-head testing of ideas is the logical next step.
Here is a summary of the key ideas and sentiments from day 4 of the tokenomics discussion:
The sentiment seems to be converging on having one official ai16z launchpad to maximize control and value accrual, while still enabling an ecosystem of Eliza launchpads. Lots of anticipation for the upcoming proposals to define the tokenomic details. Learning from the success of models like Virtuals is a priority.
Phase 1
graph TD
A[Project Launches] --> B[Liquidity]
B --> C[Staking]
C --> D[Value Accrual]
D --> E[Ecosystem Development]
E --> A
F[$ai16z Token] --> A
F --> B
F --> C
F --> D
F --> E
A -.-> F
B -.-> F
C -.-> F
D -.-> F
E -.-> F
graph TD
classDef default fill:#fff,stroke:#333,stroke-width:2px;
classDef token fill:#f9f,stroke:#333,stroke-width:4px;
classDef launch fill:#9ff,stroke:#333,stroke-width:2px;
classDef liquidity fill:#9f9,stroke:#333,stroke-width:2px;
classDef staking fill:#ff9,stroke:#333,stroke-width:2px;
classDef value fill:#f99,stroke:#333,stroke-width:2px;
classDef development fill:#99f,stroke:#333,stroke-width:2px;
A[New Eliza-based projects<br/>launch on the platform]:::launch --> B[Projects and the DAO<br/>provide token liquidity<br/>in $ai16z pairs]:::liquidity
B --> C[Users stake $ai16z to<br/>get access, rewards, and<br/>governance rights]:::staking
C --> D[Fees and liquidity<br/>flow to the<br/>$ai16z token]:::value
D --> E[Profits are reinvested<br/>into tools, grants, and<br/>ecosystem initiatives]:::development
E --> A
F{$ai16z Token}:::token --> A
F --> B
F --> C
F --> D
F --> E
A -.-> F
B -.-> F
C -.-> F
D -.-> F
E -.-> F
flowchart TB
dao["<b style='color:#1f77b4'>Ai16z DAO</b><br>(Holds Treasury,<br>decides governance)"]
treasury["<b style='color:#ff7f0e'>DAO Treasury</b><br>(Holds $ai16z + Fees)"]
eliza["<b style='color:#2ca02c'>Eliza Platform</b><br>(Agent Launchpad)<br>- Launch Agents<br>- Collect Fees (1%)<br>- Manage LP Rewards"]
pools["<b style='color:#d62728'>Agent Token + $ai16z<br>Liquidity Pools</b><br>(e.g. AItoken/ai16z)"]
lp["<b style='color:#9467bd'>Liquidity Providers</b><br>(Supply Liquidity)"]
stakers["<b style='color:#8c564b'>$ai16z Stakers</b><br>(Early Access, Voting<br>Power, Fee Share)"]
devs["<b style='color:#e377c2'>Developer Ecosystem</b><br>- Contribute to Eliza<br>- Build new Agents<br>- Earn $ai16z from DAO<br>+ LP fee pools"]
compute["<b style='color:#7f7f7f'>Decentralized Compute</b><br>Providers<br>(e.g. Hyperbolic)<br>- Payment in USDC/SOL<br>- % swapped & burned<br>- $ai16z discount"]
dao --> |"<span style='color:#1f77b4'>Governance Votes</span>"| treasury
dao --> |"<span style='color:#1f77b4'>Buy-back & Reinvest</span>"| treasury
treasury --> |"<span style='color:#ff7f0e'>Rewards & Grants</span>"| pools
treasury --> |"<span style='color:#ff7f0e'>Allocates Funding</span>"| pools
eliza <--> |"<span style='color:#2ca02c'>Interacts</span>"| pools
pools <--> |"<span style='color:#d62728'>Liquidity Flow</span>"| lp
eliza --> |"<span style='color:#2ca02c'>Staking</span>"| stakers
stakers --> |"<span style='color:#8c564b'>Earn Fees</span>"| eliza
devs --> |"<span style='color:#e377c2'>Compute Partnerships</span>"| compute
lowchart TB
subgraph "Base Layer: SOL/AT CP Pools"
CP[Constant Product Pool\nx*y=k formula]
NewProj[New Project Token]
SOL[SOL]
Fees[Trading Fees]
end
subgraph "Evolution Layer: ai16z/AT DLMM"
DLMM[Dynamic Liquidity\nMarket Maker Pool]
Bins[Concentrated Liquidity Bins]
PriceControl[Enhanced Price Control]
end
subgraph "Market Mechanics"
Discovery[Price Discovery]
Arbitrage[Arbitrage Opportunities]
ValueAccrual[Value Accrual]
end
%% Base Layer Connections
NewProj --> CP
SOL --> CP
CP --> Fees
%% Evolution Criteria
Fees -- "Meets Maturity Threshold\n(Market Cap or Trading Volume)" --> DLMM
%% DLMM Components
DLMM --> Bins
Bins --> PriceControl
%% Market Mechanics
CP --> Discovery
DLMM --> Discovery
Discovery --> Arbitrage
Arbitrage --> ValueAccrual
%% Value Flow
ValueAccrual --> |"Buy Pressure"| ai16z[/"$ai16z Token"/]
classDef default fill:#fff,stroke:#333,color:#000
classDef highlight1 fill:#333,stroke:#333,color:#fff
classDef highlight2 fill:#2a4d69,stroke:#333,color:#fff
classDef highlight3 fill:#1b4d3e,stroke:#333,color:#fff
class CP highlight1
class DLMM highlight2
class ValueAccrual highlight3