Tag: union square ventures

• CryptoParisian #112

  I have written about Bright Moments before. They are a digital art company exploring the intersection of NFTs and real-world experiences. It started as a popup gallery in Venice Beach California, where artists could show new work and where collectors could buy IRL. They then created their own pixel art collection called CryptoVenetians. It included 1,000 different people-centered NFTs by artist QianQian. Since then, they have gone on to host events and create new CryptoCitizen collections in New York, Berlin, London, Mexico City, Tokyo, and Buenos Aires. And this week they were in Paris.

  (I don’t know why they skipped over Toronto!)

  last day to mint a cryptoparisian. pic.twitter.com/KNyn21dVRt

  — seth goldstein (@seth) February 24, 2024

  Their end goal is to create a complete collection of 10,000 NFTs, most of which are tied to a specific city. (The only one that isn’t is their CryptoGalacticans collection.) What’s obviously great about this approach is that it’s a way to promote digital art and onboard new users into the crypto space. They are literally going around the world, throwing parties, and saying “look how cool and fun this whole crypto thing is.” At the same time, it also links the digital and the physical, which I believe is fundamental. We’re social beings and web3 will never change that.

  The other interesting thing about Bright Moments is that they are structured as a decentralized autonomous organization (or DOA). That’s like a company, except that governance is distributed to its tokenholders and it’s all managed on a blockchain. But it still operates as a company and it can raise money like one too. In 2021, Union Square Ventures invested 500 ETH into the DOA through a blockchain transaction that would naturally be public if you cared to look it up. Based on today’s spot price of about CA$4k per ETH, that was a CA$2 million investment.

  In the case of Bright Moments, its tokenholders are the people who own a CryptoCitizen. These are the people who get to vote on how the organization is run. They can also earn money if they do things like host a community dinner or organize a local meetup, with the idea being that, as an organization, you want to encourage this sort of bottom-up participation and innovation. I find it fascinating to watch this new governance and entity structure emerge, and it will only continue to evolve.

  I’ve been following Bright Moments more or less since they dropped the CryptoVenetians. I thought about jumping in then, but I figured I would wait to see if there would be a CryptoTorontonian. That would obviously be my number one choice. But once they announced their final list of cities, and Toronto wasn’t on it, I grumpily decided I would instead wait for a CryptoParisian. And since this week was Paris, it was time.

  I now hold CryptoParisian #112:

  

  I like that it has the Pont Neuf and that the human is wearing sunglasses.

  This means that I now have a small ownership stake in the Bright Moments DOA. So presumably I’ll soon have a say in important and serious matters! It also means that when they launch their final CryptoCitizen collection in Venice, Italy this spring (nice work going full circle here), there is a chance I might get airdropped a CryptoVenetian. It’s a random process, so whatever. I also know that it’s easy to look at this pixelated Parisian and think, “WTF, Brandon.” But something new is building here. And I’m sure that all of the folks who were in Paris this week can testify to that.

  2024.02.24

• How I’m displaying my NFT art

  

  

  I recently got a Samsung Frame TV to use as an NFT display at home. I had been looking for one for a while and I finally pulled the trigger last week. The way the Frame works is that it’s a TV when it’s on, and it’s an art display when it’s off. But I really don’t care about the TV part. I just wanted a good looking art display.

  There are a lots of purpose-built NFT displays on the market right now, including Tokenframe, Blackdove, Muse, and others. And I was very close to getting a Muse Frame.

  But ultimately I decided on the Samsung Frame because it was (1) cheaper for its size (50″), (2) it looks cool, and (3) I was fine with just a simple high-quality display. I think there will be lots more software and dongles created in the future for people who want to showcase their NFTs on whatever they happen to have at home.

  However, if you’re a crypto and NFT purist, this maybe isn’t the display for you — at least right now. Out of the box, it doesn’t connect with any crypto wallets. And so you’re not going to automatically see the provenance of each art piece (more on this below). Instead, the default method is to just upload JPEGs to the TV from Samsung’s SmartThings app (insert right-click-save-as jokes here).

  Overall, I’m really happy with the display. Here are my initial thoughts:

  • I have it set to randomly rotate through my art every 3 minutes. There’s also a motion detection feature that works reasonably well. If it doesn’t detect any motion, the display will go completely to sleep. But for some reason, it occasionally gets possessed and the TV will randomly turn on. Last week it kept turning on old Baywatch episodes. Possibly user error.
  • Samsung’s SmartThings app is bad. It’s buggy and a pain to use. For example, even though I’ve given it complete access to my phone’s photos, they never seem to show up. I have to limit access and then go and select the ones I want to use in my gallery.
  • I have found that I prefer when the art is full bleed versus within the Frame’s skeuomorphic picture mat. This is a new form of art and so I like the idea of breaking past traditions. But unless your images are 16×9 and a high enough resolution (I have generally found > 3000px wide to work), then you’re going to get prompted to insert and select a mat design.
  • I have solved this problem by manually cropping and editing the individual pieces. Some NFT collections, such as CyberBrokers, also give you vector files which allows you to play around as you see fit. Again, if you’re an NFT and/or art purist, you’re probably not going to like this. But I think of it as curating the pieces.
  • Most of my art is on Ethereum, Solana, and Tezos. Being able to upload whatever I want is helpful, because not all NFT displays support all of the chains. The Muse Frame, for instance, only supports Ethereum and Polygon right now.
  • PNG files and video files aren’t supported natively. This is a significant drawback and so eventually I know I’m going to have to change up the software that powers this display. And there are options. Bright Moments offers display software for holders of its NFTs. Fred Wilson’s venture firm USV created this setup. And I’m sure there are countless others. These can solve the provenance issue mentioned above by pulling directly from the various blockchains.

  In the end, I knew what I was getting into with the Frame. I knew it wasn’t a purpose-built NFT display and I was fine with that. It’s still early days in this space. But it sure is nice to finally see my NFT art in large format.

  2024.01.13

• Is crypto just snake oil?

  As I understand it, databases are pretty important to technology companies. Here is an excerpt from a recent post by Albert Wenger talking about why he and his company (Union Square Ventures) believe that web3/crypto is going to unlock new value for our society:

  As a first approximation all the big powerful internet companies are really database providers. Facebook is a database of people’s profiles, their friend graphs and their status updates. Paypal is a database of people’s account balances. Amazon is a database of SKUs, payment credentials and purchase histories. Google is a database of web pages and query histories. Of course all of these companies have built a great deal more over time, but operating a database has stayed at the core of why they are powerful. Only they get to decide who has permission to read and write to this database and which parts of it they get access to.

  So how will web3 be any better? Well blockchains, at least right now, are poorer performing databases in almost all dimensions, according to Albert. And this is one of the reasons why they’re being so quickly dismissed by most people. But they do have one key advantage: permissionless data. No single entity controls a blockchain database. More from Albert:

  It is difficult to overstate how big an innovation this is. We went from not being able to do something at all to having a first working version. Again to be clear, I am not saying this will solve all problems. Of course it won’t. And it will even create new problems of its own. Still, permissionless data was a crucial missing piece – its absence resulted in a vast power concentration. As such Web3 can, if properly developed and with the right kind of regulation, provide a meaningful shift in power back to individuals and communities.

  All of this said, I do agree with Fred Wilson and others that the web3/crypto enthusiasts on Twitter these days are getting to be a bit much. For obvious reasons, everyone is trying to pump the crypto stuff that they own. And it can certainly feel like shills trying to sell snake oil. But as Fred pointed out today, this isn’t the first time that we’ve been here:

  It reminds me of the early days of web2 in 2001/2002/2003, when we started USV. That was also a time of great cynicism. We almost did not get our first fund raised. Nobody was buying the story we were telling. But of course, that story turned out to be true. And I am confident this one will too.

  If/when this story does turn out to be true — and I believe it’s a when — I think we will see it permeate through all sectors of the economy, including how we plan, build, and operate our cities. Of course, this will probably take decades and much of what will happen is unknowable right now. But it’s pretty hard to ignore that this was a pivotal year for the crypto space.

  2021.12.29

• A new $162 million fund dedicated to climate change

  

  This week, Union Square Ventures, which describes itself as a “thesis-driven venture capital firm,” announced a new $162 million Climate Fund. The thesis for this fund is pretty simple. They want to invest in companies that either provide mitigation for or adaption to the climate crisis. The thinking behind this approach is as follows. They want to invest in companies that directly attack the causes of climate change (mitigation), but they are also recognizing that the climate crisis is not some distant thing. It’s already here, which is why it’s important to also focus on companies that are dealing with the consequences of it (adaptation).

  One of their first investments is in a company called Leap. What Leap does is provide the connective (software) tissue between local energy devices/applications and the broader energy markets. For example, let’s say you have a Leap-enabled smart thermostat. If the grid is in need of power, it might automatically reduce your local energy consumption so as to help with load balancing on the broader network. In exchange for this, you would earn money for your contributions. In effect, Leap acts as a kind of virtual power plant.

  Why does this matter? Well, it matters because two important things seem to be happening with energy production: (1) It’s moving toward renewables and (2) production and storage are both decentralizing. Assuming this trend continues, there will be an increasing need for software to help manage energy consumption, production, load balancing, the broader energy markets, and so on. That’s where companies like Leap come in. It’s also why many are arguing that Tesla is so valuable. More than an EV company, it is creating a new decentralized renewable energy network through its car batteries, powerwalls, and solar panels.

  That does sound valuable.

  Photo by Jason Blackeye on Unsplash

  2021.01.09

• Patch Homes announces $5mm Series A round to grow fractional home equity platform

  There are a number of home equity startups in the marketplace today.

  A few years ago I wrote about an alternative product to HELOCs or home equity loans, called Point. And earlier this year, I wrote about a startup, called Landed, that is helping “essential professionals,” such as teachers, with their down payments. They’ll contribute up to 10% of the value of a home in exchange for a share in any future gains, or losses.

  Today, another startup in the space — Patch Homes — announced a $5mm Series A round. From what I can tell, it appears to be similar to Point in that it involves the fractional sale of home equity. Though, to be clear, the model is distinct from the fractional homeownership that is popular in many high demand vacation destinations. Here’s a bit more on how the product works (source):

  The Patch model enables homeowners to “tap into” their home equity by selling 20–40% to Patch’s affiliate, Patch Capital, which shares in both the upside and downside. The homeowner remains in control of her or his home for the life of the relationship and exits via a sale or refinances in 7–10 years.

  While this product is not for all homeowners, it provides a new and important financing option. The Fed estimates that home equity ownership in the US is $15 Trillion. It makes no sense that the only financing options are additional debt or a complete sale of the property. Patch gives homeowners the option to de-lever their personal balance sheet or otherwise raise cash. Clients have used Patch proceeds for numerous reasons, the most popular of which are to pay off debt, increase liquid savings and finance home improvements.

  I am not surprised to see this gaining momentum. The biggest benefit is that it gives you partial liquidity (i.e. cash up to $250,000), without having to sell your property or take on additional debt service payments. It’s equity, not debt. Fred Wilson, an investor in the company, calls it fractionalizing home equity.

  2019.09.12

• Homeschooling is one of the fastest growing trends in education

  Earlier this week, Union Square Ventures announced that it was leading a Series A investment in an online education marketplace targeted at K-12 students. The platform is called Outschool, and you can think of it as a form of homeschooling.

  Today, there about 55 million K-12 students in the US, with around 9% enrolled in private schools. Charter schooling is on the rise (somewhere around 3 million students), but so is homeschooling (similarly around 2.5 million students). Data here.

  Homeschooling, at least in the US, largely started within religious groups. But that is starting to change and it is becoming more widely adopted. USV has made a bet that this trend will continue.

  If you look at Outschool’s model, you’ll see that it shares a lot of similarities with other successful internet marketplaces. It is direct-to-consumer (the internet has a way of getting rid of intermediaries). The courses are significantly cheaper than traditional classroom schooling ($10-15 per course). And the supply-side of the marketplace (the teachers) is far more open and accessible to non-traditional participants.

  USV gives the example of a human rights lawyer who is teaching on the platform and now earning more than $10,000 per month in additional income. I’ve never enjoyed online classes, but now that we have reliable video chat, maybe that starts to change.

  In any event, where my mind goes with all of this is the impact on our built environment. We are heading toward more flexible spaces and we are doing a lot more from home.

  2019.05.30

• Risk game

  “Francis is one of the most decisive people I know. He made a commitment to invest in our first venture capital fund in a five-minute cab we shared to work one morning.”

  —Fred Wilson, Co-Founder, Venture Capitalist, and Blogger, Union Square Ventures

  Francis Greenburger, who is founder and CEO of the real estate investment and development firm Time Equities, recently appeared on Barry Ritholtz’s Masters in Business Podcast.

  They touch on a number of topics, including why development sometimes produces more bankruptcies than billionaires; why development margins are compressed in Toronto; and how Francis popularized the co-op in New York. 

  Francis is also the author of Risk Game: Self Portrait of an Entrepreneur. So if you like the podcast – which is a great listen – there’s also a book for you. Click here for the podcast.

  2019.01.05

• Create things people love

  I just finished listening to this podcast about venture capital and consumer products. One of the underlying questions is whether we are currently in a “consumer downturn.” Rebecca Kaden of Union Square Ventures (USV) talks about the importance of “platform shifts” for venture returns. These are moments where a new technology hits the marketplace and there’s a corresponding mass consumer adoption. When and where will that next shift occur? Maybe it’ll be in real estate.

  I like the discussions at 10:00 and 13:50. The first deals with the importance of non-paid customer acquisition strategies for consumer products. Rather than relying on bought attention, you really need organic growth strategies, which is often an indication that people are passionate about your product. This is arguably more important when you’re fundamentally reliant on massive growth/scale, but whether we’re talking about software or a home, I still believe it’s paramount. Create things people love.

  The second point is about commerce, Amazon, and how USV avoids investing in companies that are unlikely to ever win against Bezos. Kaden’s position is that Amazon’s advantage is and has been more executional than structural. They are simply really good at doing things better. But Amazon wins at logistics, speed, and value. They are not as focused on experience, entertainment, and discovery. And people still want that.

  I’ll stop there. If you can’t see the podcast below, click here.

  [soundcloud url=”https://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/507691569″ params=”color=#ff5500&auto_play=false&hide_related=false&show_comments=true&show_user=true&show_reposts=false&show_teaser=true&visual=true” width=”100%” height=”300″ iframe=”true” /]

  2018.10.06

• Hmm…architecture and basic income

  

  Albert Wenger recently published a post on his blog about architecture and basic income. Albert is a venture capitalist and is currently working on a book called World After Capital, which I have mentioned before on this blog. He is also an advocate of basic income as a solution to the growing inequality that the modern economy seems to be producing.

  In this latest post he wades into the world of architecture with two assertions that I would like to respond to today. The first is that with basic income the current trend of everyone piling up in large cities will end. We will decentralize in search of cheaper land on the outskirts of cities. And the second is that affordable housing could perhaps be produced with a more open source approach to architectural drawings and new construction.

  In terms of his first point, I’m not entirely clear why someone earning a basic income would suddenly decentralize. In the comments there is some discussion about how retirees, on a fixed income, often move outward in search of more affordable housing. I understand that phenomenon, but I am not convinced in this scenario. 

  There has been lots of talk about the demise of cities because of new technologies and other factors. But agglomeration economies have proved, again and again, to be a powerful centralizing force. Let’s also not forget about the environmental impacts of large scale decentralization, which would only be partially mitigated by the widespread adoption of electric vehicles. 

  Secondly, you can build a house without an architect. The issue isn’t that good bathroom details are hard to come by. Some of the bigger issues are likely the availability of land (decentralization, I guess, is supposed to solve this); construction costs (it’s a highly inefficient process that generates copious amounts of waste); and the immense regulatory burdens imposed on new construction (process, time, and costs).

  All of this stemmed from a visit that Albert did with a group of architecture students who are researching the relationship between architecture and basic income. I would be very curious to see what they produce.

  What are your thoughts?

  Photo by Mathyas Kurmann on Unsplash

  2018.03.03

• Motivation and coordination

  Albert Wenger of Union Square Ventures recently gave a talk at the 2017 Blockstack Summit about “Decentralization and the Knowledge Age.”

  He starts by talking about motivation and coordination.

  The state, he argues, is good at coordination, but not so good at motivation. The market, on the other hand, is good at motivation, but not so good at coordination. Money and self-interest are powerful incentives.

  He then talks about how networks have improved the market, the firm, and the state. When the cost of sharing information drops, everything gets better.

  But there are downsides to networks. For one, they form monopolies. Consider Facebook in social. Google in search. Amazon in ecommerce.

  They also create environments ripe for censorship and “algorithmic abuse.” Everything you see in your feeds is optimized to make you respond and/or feel a certain way. The line between delivering you relevant content and deliberate manipulation is perhaps a fine one.

  So what’s the solution? Decentralized blockchain networks are one exciting possibility. But they also have their own limits and drawbacks. Albert touches on those in his talk.

  The video is about 24 minutes. If you can’t see it below, click here.

  [youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LgQT874KHuw?rel=0&w=560&h=315]

  2017.08.15