Blockstream closes $21M round(blockstream.com)
blockstream.com
Blockstream closes $21M round
http://blockstream.com/2014/11/17/blockstream-closes-21m-seed-round/
5 comments
In what is surely a coincidence, 21M is also the total number of Bitcoins that can be mined.
Somebody announces a Bitcoin 2.0 idea just about every other month -- ethereum, counterparty, opentransaction, and so on -- so why does this one deserve $21M?
All of these projects have been underway for quite some time. Indeed, Open-Transactions is almost as old as bitcoin itself.
Nevertheless, my (highly biased) opinion is that Blockstream is worth paying attention to because unlike the above mentioned projects we are adding new functionality by extending bitcoin itself, thereby decreasing fragmentation and lowering startup costs for new ventures.
Nevertheless, my (highly biased) opinion is that Blockstream is worth paying attention to because unlike the above mentioned projects we are adding new functionality by extending bitcoin itself, thereby decreasing fragmentation and lowering startup costs for new ventures.
Making the world a better place!
Are you going to use some of that 21MM$$ to buy some of the coins currently setup for auction by the US Marshall?
Are you going to use some of that 21MM$$ to buy some of the coins currently setup for auction by the US Marshall?
> Are you going to use some of that 21MM$$ to buy some of the coins currently setup for auction by the US Marshall?
I wish! Nah, only if we had reason to buy that many coins anyway. We got funded to make infrastructure and develop products, not to buy and hold bitcoin (except as operational needs demand).
In all seriousness, one of the problems of this space is that it has been historically difficult for ROI on bitcoin companies to outperform bitcoin itself. We'll see if we're able to buck that trend ;)
I wish! Nah, only if we had reason to buy that many coins anyway. We got funded to make infrastructure and develop products, not to buy and hold bitcoin (except as operational needs demand).
In all seriousness, one of the problems of this space is that it has been historically difficult for ROI on bitcoin companies to outperform bitcoin itself. We'll see if we're able to buck that trend ;)
For one, this company has all of the smartest people.
Almost the entire team are Bitcoin core contributors.
They probably didn't need investment. Anyone who contributed to the core probably mined alot in the early days and therefore has a stash of bitcoins.
However being smart they decided to risk someone elses money.
They probably didn't need investment. Anyone who contributed to the core probably mined alot in the early days and therefore has a stash of bitcoins.
However being smart they decided to risk someone elses money.
You seem under the delusion that investment / acquisition etc happen based on merit.
More often than not, it's just about who knows who, back room dealings and favours.
More often than not, it's just about who knows who, back room dealings and favours.
In this case, you're wrong. This team is easily the highest IQ concentration in Bitcoin history.
No other group comes close; in fact, I would have said their only possible weakness was that they might have been too nerdy to raise a round. Luckily, I don't know shit about their fundraising skills. This is easily the most bullish news Bitcoin has had in years, in my opinion. Great team, fantastic tech and theoretical track record, and a technology that will build Bitcoin value and usefulness. What's not to like?
No other group comes close; in fact, I would have said their only possible weakness was that they might have been too nerdy to raise a round. Luckily, I don't know shit about their fundraising skills. This is easily the most bullish news Bitcoin has had in years, in my opinion. Great team, fantastic tech and theoretical track record, and a technology that will build Bitcoin value and usefulness. What's not to like?
I know gmaxwell at least is ridiculously smart. I get the feeling this is a powerhouse founding team, huge group of talent, huge pile of cash. Part of me wants to be in on that team.
The part about AirBnB I really enjoyed. Because at first I thought, I bet they are all working remote and doing whatever on their individual projects. It sounds like a large diverse team which really needed to get co-located if they wanted to get real... and they did. Ultimately, there is no current replacement to actually physically moving everyone to someplace.
I have no idea why SF, but I imagine someone(s) in the early group were already reasonably near there. But I would be surprised if blockstream.com needed the SF tech force. They may have just the right number of people right now. That approach would give them some incredible runway, but so many investors need faster ROI. $21M is a huge, massive commitment.
I guess the missing piece is valuation. What percentage, or implied percentage range, or whatever, of the company do you get for $21M? How do you even put together a model for a $21M seed round? Maybe a Seed Round this large is basically a long-term bet on this group to make great things. I assume there are no-strings-attached, and this is people with Bitcoin who want Bitcoin to the valuable. It takes a lot of work to keep a currency running!
What's Blockstream's revenue model Do the the investors hold any BTC? Is their goal to increase the value of BTC, or is it BTC price neutral? Blockstream succeeds with Bitcoin succeeding (the Bitcoin P2P Protocol, its infra). But the 'payment' and 'asset' portion of Bitcoin could be excess baggage which governments hate too much. There could be better uses of Blockstream's time beyond currency applications. I mean, there are many features you can build that wouldn't increase demand for units of 'satoshi'. Then again, it's a common refrain, if you own many BTC then invest in Bitcoin. Better software should result in broader adoption. But there's nothing inherent about a cryptocurrency that the bits should cost anything. So I'd assume there's some revenue model.
Another perspective: Ultimately the price of a Bitcoin will fall to the amount necessary to anti-DDoS. There can be no price beyond anti-DDoS because there is no more utility than exactly that. Bitcoin as a currency will be a ridiculously failed experiment, because why would you hold $$$ inside some bits? The scarce bits are just to prevent DDoS and properly distribute access. You shouldn't need to pay money for something like that, unless you are speculation. Speculation can exist, fine, put it on its own chain.