Vote Stance
I’m sharing my voting rationale to invite feedback before casting my vote:
After reviewing our budget targets, I believe we should start the Service Provider Program at the $2.7M baseline. The program’s new structure allows teams to request additional funding mid-cycle, meaning we should expect this program to increase in cost during the year from whatever we vote in now.
If we front load the maximum budget now before we select providers and projects, we’ll have limited funds to allocate to the additional increases that are requested. Leaving some funds off the table gives us more precision in how we deploy capital across the program’s lifecycle.
Budget Math and Analysis
Analysis using 2024 numbers
| Source | Amount (USDC) | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| 2024 ENS Revenue | 27,065,523 | Revenue from Steakhouse’s Dune Dashboard |
| 2024 Endowment DeFi Results | 3,819,438 | Endowment data from karpatkey |
| Total | 30,884,961 |
Some of the above was deferred revenue. According to this dashboard from steakhouse, actual 2024 income was 13,289,358 USDC (representing only the USDC value of ETH inflows, excluding deferred revenue).
Now, calculating the forward looking spend:
Forecasted Spending (2025)
| Item | Amount (USDC) | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| ENS Labs | 9,700,000 | This is already locked in for 2025 |
| Service Providers Streaming | 3,600,000 | Assuming this is final spend after requested increases |
| Working Group Expenditures | 2,739,000 | Based on 2024 spend in the reports linked below, and assuming no increased WG spending from 2024 levels |
| Sum | 16,039,000 |
In the initial Brain Dump thread, we targeted 50% of revenue (approximately 15.4M based on these estimates) for total DAO expenditures. A 3.6M SPP total budget would put 2025 expenditures at 16M, meaning starting the SPP at 3.6M level would put us over that 50% target even before the likely increases to deserving teams.
Working Group Spending Reports