Evaluation of Grant Application

Exploring the mechanics behind grant application analysis and processing

Watch this video for a visual presentation of our grant evaluation process

Each section renders its own score to then be weighted for a final score and recommendations. If passed, the application will progress to the next stage

Here is an evaluation of an example application:

Meme Factory

- Criteria: Relevance to crypto, memorability, uniqueness, and brand potential. - Analysis: "Meme Factory" has decent relevance in the crypto space since memes have a strong association with internet culture and the "factory" aspect implies scalability. However, it lacks uniqueness and could come across as somewhat generic. - Score: 7/10 - Weighted Score: 7 × 0.12 = 0.84

memes.com

- Criteria: TLD evaluation. - Analysis: The ".com" TLD is the most recognized and trusted, making it highly valuable and credible. This is a perfect domain choice. - Score: 10/10 - Weighted Score: 10 × 0.15 = 1.5

Memes LTD

- Criteria: Professionalism, industry relevance, and general perception. - Analysis: While "LTD" adds a professional touch, it is less compelling or memorable than a purely creative name or brand solely associated with crypto/web3. Additionally, it does not indicate any prior crypto/Web3 track record. - Score: 5/10 - Weighted Score: 5 × 0.15 = 0.75

UAE

- Criteria: Crypto regulatory environment, tech ecosystem maturity, and market potential. - Analysis: The UAE is an emerging hub for crypto, blockchain, and Web3 innovation with favorable regulations and strong ambitions to promote digital transformation. It scores highly as a jurisdiction. - Score: 9/10 - Weighted Score: 9 × 0.3 = 2.7

Memes

- Criteria: Market demand, innovation potential, and strategic fit. - Analysis: The meme sector is a high-interest niche within crypto/Web3, given the meme token trend (e.g., Dogecoin, Shiba Inu). This sector aligns well with crypto culture, and there is strong demand for innovative platforms in this area. - Score: 10/10 - Weighted Score: 10 × 0.4 = 4.0

YES (Open Source Contributions)

- Criteria: Whether contributions to open-source projects have been made. - Analysis: The application states "YES," which suggests a degree of credibility and value to the Web3 ecosystem. - Score: 10/10 - Weighted Score: 10 × 0.3 = 3.0

We will create a meme platform to launch new meme tokens every single day

- Criteria: Problem-solution fit, technical feasibility, market potential, and innovation level. - Analysis: The concept has clear market potential given the meme token trend, but launching new meme tokens daily could reduce quality and lead to skepticism regarding sustainability and innovation. Feasibility is somewhat unclear. - Score: 6/10 - Weighted Score: 6 × 0.5 = 3.0

We are very technical

- Criteria: Crypto/Web3 experience, technical expertise, and previous successes. - Analysis: This claim lacks any concrete evidence or previous examples to substantiate the technical experience. Without detail, it cannot score highly. - Score: 4/10 - Weighted Score: 4 × 0.6 = 2.4

Final Weighted Score Calculation: | Element | Score | IC | Weighted Score | |--------------------------------------|-----------|--------|---------------------| | Meme Factory (Name) | 7 | 0.12 | 0.84 | | memes.com (TLD) | 10 | 0.15 | 1.5 | | Memes LTD (Professionalism) | 5 | 0.15 | 0.75 | | UAE (Regulation/Market Potential) | 9 | 0.3 | 2.7 | | Memes (Market Fit) | 10 | 0.4 | 4.0 | | YES (Open Source Contributions) | 10 | 0.3 | 3.0 | | Meme Platform (Innovation) | 6 | 0.5 | 3.0 | | We are very technical | 4 | 0.6 | 2.4 | | Rug pull statement (Supplement Info)| 1 | 0.15 | 0.15 | | Total Weighted Score | | | 18.34 |

Final Recommendation

The total score of 18.34 falls below the passing threshold of 18.69 (70%). While there are strengths in the market fit, open-source contributions, and regulatory environment, concerns over professionalism, technical feasibility, and trustworthiness (due to the "rug pull" statement) hinder the application's viability.

Conclusion

This application does not pass and should not be considered further. The team must address their professionalism, trust concerns, and ability to substantiate technical expertise.