Early thinking on GG25

🧙 🧙‍♀️ Ideas and Open Discussion
1

Early thinking: GG25 Under Two Core Constraints

The Constraints

1. Keep burn low.
Gitcoin must run GG25 in a way that preserves runway and limits direct spend.

2. Rebuild relevance and upside.
Gitcoin needs to regain narrative relevance in the broader ecosystem and create real paths to utility

GG25

GG25 becomes the experiment that operates inside these two guardrails.

Working Hypothesis

GG25 might focus on a simple idea. If Gitcoin concentrates on one to two frontier domains where momentum is already building, we could create high leverage with minimal burn. The concept is to run targeted PGF rounds, funded by coalitions - not just Gitcoin, that surface early builders, then use that discovery layer to generate dealflow for an investment engine that strengthens long-term upside.

This keeps costs contained while positioning Gitcoin inside fast-moving, high-context ecosystems.

Potential Frontier Metas

We may explore areas where energy is clear and where coordinated funding can shape the frontier. Examples include:
• x402
• AI agents and infra
• Stablecoins
• DePIN
• Interop
• InfoFi and privacy

These are metas where early public goods support helps define the culture and gives Gitcoin a reason to be at the table.

How GG25 Operates Under These Constraints

1. PGF rounds as the discovery engine
Targeted rounds in chosen metas help Gitcoin gather signal, meet the earliest credible builders, and stay relevant where innovation is happening. This costs relatively little compared to past broad-spectrum rounds.

2. Coalitional funding to keep Gitcoin’s burn low
Instead of Gitcoin paying for everything, GG25 would intentionally convene partners, foundations, and aligned funders. Gitcoin brings coordination, credibility, and the PGF stack. Partners bring capital and attention. This keeps our treasury burn contained.

3. Pair PGF with selective token investments
Discovery from PGF rounds can feed a lightweight investment engine that builds treasury longevity. Even small checks could help treasury longevity while reinforcing Gitcoin’s role as an allocator (with real risk of loss).

4. Relevance through presence in the frontier
By anchoring ourselves in metas with real momentum, Gitcoin stays visible and important. Funders, protocols, and founders meet us where the future is forming.

What Success Might Look Like

GG25 proves a simple model.

Low burn, high leverage, strong coalition building, clear dealflow, and early positions in promising ecosystems. Relevance increases because Gitcoin is back at the frontier. Upside increases because PGF-powered discovery becomes the pipeline for token investments that strengthen the treasury.

GG25 becomes the first step toward a self-sustaining allocation engine that aligns Gitcoin’s mission with long-term financial durability.

These are just my early thoughts on where we might go. Feedback welcome!

clarification (added 2026-08-04): this post was exploratory thinking shared for community debate, not an offer or a promise. gtc is a governance token with no economic rights, as it has been since launch in may 2021. finances discussed on the gov forum are those of gitcoin’s organizational entities. ‘upside’ throughout this post means organizational treasury durability, not gtc appreciation; the investment-engine idea was exploratory. dyor.

Disclaimer: This post is for informative purposes only and is not financial advice. This post reflects my personal views, not a decision or commitment by Gitcoin governance. Forward-looking items in it are targets, not commitments. The information in these posts is subject to change as we continue learning. This post may contain estimates, may contain errors, and is provided on a best-effort basis. DYOR, do not make any financial decisions based on these posts.

8 Likes
2

Gitcoin needs to distinguish the investments it’s making that are geared towards improving public goods in the Ethereum ecosystem vs. investments geared towards deal flow and financial ROI. These can inform each other, but if you conflate the 2 you will fail at both.

The reason that some of the early projects on Gitcoin grew up to be so massively valuable - like Uniswap and 1inch - is that they are not public goods. They have very clear, natural, profitable business models, with happy paying customers and revenue that far exceeds expenses.

The reason Gitcoin failed to capture the upside of their success is that it pretended they were public goods.

To give everyone a refresher… a public good is a good or service that doesn’t have a viable profitable business model, or where it’s so valuable that it should be made available to everyone regardless if they can afford it.

In the default world it’s things like:

  • a city park
  • well-paved roads
  • governance
  • education

In Ethereum, it’s things like:

  • testnets
  • compilers
  • governance
  • education and builder onboarding

Fruitless exercises that will make Gitcoin unhappy forever:

  • Running public goods investment rounds and expecting good financial ROI
  • Running private goods investment rounds and expecting the ecosystem’s public goods to get any better
  • Not understanding the difference between a public and private good

All this said, I appreciate the emphasis on value accrual for Gitcoin and the long term financial viability of the org… it’s long overdue and will be a godsend for the community.

7 Likes
3

my ‘yes and’ to your post is that some things are both public goods and private goods. for example ethereum is a double sided market between ppl who write state to the network (private goods) and those who read state from it (public good). there was a 9999x upside for the private goods investors while the public goods part is/remains free forever.

networks are fascinating.

anyway i agree having clear guard rails, that differ when youre investing for public good vs private good purposes, is good.

Disclaimer: This post is for informative purposes only and is not financial advice. This post reflects my personal views, not a decision or commitment by Gitcoin governance. Forward-looking items in it are targets, not commitments. The information in these posts is subject to change as we continue learning. This post may contain estimates, may contain errors, and is provided on a best-effort basis. DYOR, do not make any financial decisions based on these posts.

2 Likes
4

yep, and even in a hybrid public good / private good org like that, distinguishing between those 2 is critical.

Sports teams are a default world equivalent. They sell merchandise and tickets to games (private goods), but fans are happy for free when they win (public good).

2 Likes
5

Excited to strategise on 2026 and beyond in the open!

I agree that the tension between Public <> Private goods and Grants <> Investments will be key for us to manage - but this is also where most of the value is hidden!

Given that co-funding relationships take time to mature, and investments need enough time and constant support to yield, I believe it’s key that any future programs clearly build on the past GG round learnings and traction. As such, I would recommend for the 2026 plans to build as much as possible around GG24 domains, with minimal new frontiers introduced in the first iteration.

2 Likes
6

Thanks for sharing this framing — “low burn + rebuild relevance/upside” is a useful constraint set.

One thought from the security/public-goods side: whatever 1–2 frontier metas you pick (agents, stablecoins, DePIN, InfoFi/privacy, etc.), safety tooling is a cross-cutting enabler that tends to pay back in reduced fraud/externalities.

A practical way to keep burn low while improving signal quality:

  • include a lightweight “safety/tooling” lens in the round (not a separate mega-track)

  • score for measurable external impact (e.g., users protected, incidents surfaced, time-to-detection, open-source reusability)

  • encourage coalition partners to sponsor “bounties” for specific threat models relevant to the chosen meta

Question: are you leaning toward allowing projects that serve multiple frontier domains (shared infra), or will GG25 prefer meta-specific primitives only?

Happy to share a brief impact outline + evaluation rubric if it’s useful (no links unless asked).

7

Really like the focus on “AI agents and infra” as a frontier meta. This is exactly where we need to build – creating economic infrastructure where AI agents can participate alongside humans. The key is low friction, instant settlement, and clear incentive alignment. Worth exploring how GG25 can catalyze tools that make this possible.

1 Like
8

This is exactly why TaskBounty exists. We’re building an AI-native bounty marketplace where humans and AI agents can compete on tasks with fixed crypto rewards, instant settlement, and zero friction. Perfect economic infrastructure for the “AI agents and infra” meta that desperately needs attention in GG25.

1 Like