Interview: Mensh, ChainCatcher

Guest: Will, Core Contributor of Alliance DAO

Alliance DAO was established in 2020 as a leading Web3 accelerator and founder community, helping the top 1% of Web3 founders launch and grow their companies through a 10-week program led by renowned Web3 experts. The Alliance DAO community includes founders, lawyers, auditors, liquidity providers, market makers, and more.

As of now, Alliance DAO has held 14 startup accelerators, with the total market value of the incubated companies reaching $11 billion. In this cycle, incubated projects such as Pump.fun, Moonshot, and Glow have all performed exceptionally well.

In this conversation, we invited Will Robinson, the first employee of Alliance DAO, to share his personal experiences in the Web3 field, insights on how to evaluate projects and founders.

Personal Experience

ChainCatcher: Let's start with your personal experience in the crypto field.

Will Robinson: My career began as an academic researcher. I spent eight years in graduate school studying video games, tabletop games, and sports, focusing on the history and culture of games. I worked in the English, sociology, and communication departments, researching mechanism design and how games help designers create more artistic games. My focus was on indie games, especially those that are shocking and not just for entertainment. For example, I designed a game about when the "best time" to commit suicide is during high school, studying the mechanism design and incentive structures of those who had early suicidal thoughts. These were the themes I explored, and they were very challenging in terms of design.

Later, I left game research and academia because my cousin Dan (whom I consider one of the smartest people in the crypto field and the head of research at Paradigm) introduced me to Bitcoin. He told me how my research in mechanism design could help people in the blockchain space. It was early 2017, and I was about to finish my PhD, so I decided to switch careers. I started attending meetups in Montreal, looking for opportunities among a group of passionate crypto enthusiasts.

After four or five meetups, I found a job helping people promote their auditing business. The pay was very low, and I had no work experience, but my academic background made me good at storytelling and marketing. They wanted me to help them promote their products. We assisted anyone who needed to prove to regulators that they indeed held cryptocurrencies on their books. For example, if you were the Ethereum Foundation, you needed to report your financial situation in a specific way according to Swiss regulations in the first few years, and then a stricter reporting structure a few years later. We worked with Swiss entities like the EOS Foundation and Lisk Foundation. Additionally, if you were a fund in the Cayman Islands holding cryptocurrencies on your balance sheet, you needed to report to the local regulator CIMA (Cayman Islands Monetary Authority) to ensure fiduciary responsibility.

We audited Cayman funds, foundations, and exchanges around the world. Exchanges usually have regulators, and we ensured they held cryptocurrencies safely, correctly, and intelligently, training staff, conducting penetration tests, and risk assessments. I worked there for nearly four years, gradually becoming an expert in the field. I transitioned from a marketer to an auditor or audit expert while continuously learning more about cryptocurrencies and adapting to the tech space. Then I applied to join Alliance, becoming their first employee responsible for building the accelerator program.

Now, I have been here for nearly four years. I have tried almost every role, including fundraising, mentoring, marketing, and research. I constantly switch roles to find what I enjoy. In a startup, you can decide what the most important thing is next and delegate tasks to those who are better suited for them. I enjoy communicating with people, so I spend a lot of time mentoring.

ChainCatcher: What role do you enjoy the most in a startup?

Will Robinson: I love helping teams prepare for Demo Day. We have 20 teams in each batch, and about 10 to 15 teams will be ready to present to venture capitalists at the end of the batch. I spend a lot of time communicating with each team, teaching them how to tell their startup story, how to present it quickly and engagingly, so that people are willing to invest.

By working with 100 to 150 startups, it not only gives the teams a compelling story to attract investors but also helps them gain a deeper understanding of themselves, why their company is important, and what makes it unique. We put a lot of effort into preparing for Demo Day. As of the last batch, this is one of the parts that founders love about Alliance, which makes me very proud.

ChainCatcher: How did your academic experience influence your subsequent work?

Will Robinson: During my PhD, I didn't learn much that could be directly applied to the Web2 gaming field. Because Web3 games are completely different from Web2 games, at least for the foreseeable future.

However, I learned how to present, how to collaborate with others, and most importantly, I learned how to face a very difficult problem alone and spend a long time solving it under extreme psychological stress (like dealing with a complex issue in isolation). Therefore, the most important thing my doctoral studies taught me was how to handle ambiguity. Facing questions without ready-made answers, with no formulas to refer to, everything needs to be created anew by yourself.

ChainCatcher: There are many trivial tasks to handle when helping startups; how do you manage your time?

Will Robinson: A lot of my time is spent connecting teams with venture capitalists, from preparing for discussions to formal introductions. I maintain a very long list of venture capitalists to ensure I can introduce 50 to 100 potential investors to the teams. This is very time-consuming.

Additionally, I spend a lot of time reviewing potential applicants or future alumni because they apply to our programs. We receive nearly 2000 applications for each batch. These applications take time to read, and I also need to spend time interviewing applicants, sometimes requiring a second interview.

Another major task is fundraising for our third fund. Alliance already has two funds and is currently raising the third.

Decision-Making Process at Alliance DAO

ChainCatcher: How do you efficiently evaluate projects? What does the decision-making process look like?

Will Robinson: Each application is evaluated from two aspects: whether the team is excellent and whether the idea is outstanding. I believe that an excellent team is more important than a great idea, possibly two to three times more important. The idea is more about proving that the team can come up with a good idea rather than the importance of the idea itself.

Alliance is not fixated on specific fields; we focus more on excellent founders. Because we get involved very early, we can almost be certain that they will pivot at some point. We help them adjust, collaborate with them, and even support their pivots.

For example, the Pump.Fun team was called Caviar when they joined, and later they built a 3:3 application based on Friend.tech. If we had rejected them because we didn't like Caviar, it would have been one of the biggest mistakes of our lives. But we didn't do that because we knew the team was exceptional.

What constitutes an excellent team? I believe this is the core of early-stage venture capital, and it requires firsthand observation. Excellence does not necessarily mean having attended prestigious schools, having worked at big companies, or having previously founded successful startups. As Alliance's founder Qiao said, to be a great founder, you need to be "traumatized and a bit introverted." Only a truly "broken" mind can succeed in this space. What we are looking for is extreme drive.

Most founders don't even know why they are motivated to create their companies. Therefore, an important part of my interviews is guiding them through self-reflection. I try to get them to tell me why they want to do this. They usually start by saying, "It's to solve this problem." Then I ask, "But why do you want to solve this problem?" They might say, "Because it's an important issue." I continue to probe, "Why do you personally want to solve this problem?" They might say, "Because I had this problem before." Then I ask, "Why don't you let someone else solve this problem? Why does it have to be you?" I keep digging until I uncover something, like what happened to them when they were six years old that makes them feel compelled to solve this problem. This deep exploration is crucial.

ChainCatcher: How many rounds does a team need to go through to enter Alliance?

Will Robinson: Two rounds. Usually, the first round is 15 to 20 minutes, and the second round is 30 to 45 minutes. Y Combinator only does 10-minute interviews. As you gain more experience, you find that you can quickly judge whether someone is excellent. We call it "heat." We ask each other, "Can you feel the heat in the interview?" Some people have heat, and some do not, and the manifestation of heat varies. Because we are still building a community, and Alliance is also a DAO, this community cannot have bad apples. Since we are still small, one bad apple can spoil the whole batch.

ChainCatcher: What percentage of projects stand out and give you a sense of "heat"?

Will Robinson: We interview 20% of the applicants, then interview 20% of those, and finally accept 20% of that group.

ChainCatcher: Have there been cases where you missed out on excellent founders?

Will Robinson: I can give two examples. In the last batch, there was a company called Force Prime. The team consisted of three older gentlemen from Eastern Europe who had a lot of experience in Web2 gaming but very little understanding of Web3 gaming. They applied, and we rejected them. They applied again, and after the interview, we still rejected them, explaining the reasons. They applied a third time, and I interviewed them again and rejected them, continuing to explain the reasons. It was only on their fifth application that I let them in.

Part of the reason was that I realized my biases were affecting my judgment; they were actually very talented developers, smart and eager to learn. I was also glad to let them struggle outside for a while because their initial idea was indeed terrible. They didn't have enough understanding of Web3, but later they became more seasoned and familiar with how Web3 works. I really enjoyed working with them; the founders were exceptional.

Of course, there are also cases where we rejected applicants and they did not apply again. One particularly notable case is Monad. At that time, we were uncertain about their ability to build a community, and their valuation was relatively high. In the early days of Alliance, we did not have strict limits on the valuations of projects we accepted, allowing teams with varying valuations, sometimes even very high ones. But at that time, we lacked "purchasing power" and reputation; people did not think it was worth giving us 7% of their company shares. Now, we no longer face this issue, as enough people believe we are doing very well and that such share dilution is justified.

Business Model of the Accelerator

ChainCatcher: Many VCs also want to incubate projects themselves. What do you think your competitive advantage is compared to VCs that incubate on their own?

Will Robinson: I think VCs can do well with "Entrepreneur in Residence" (EIR) programs. For example, Paradigm is a great example. They accept a founder, work with them, help them come up with an idea, and start a company. But they can only support a few people at a time.

I believe that running a full-fledged accelerator is beyond the scope of most VCs and is not financially viable. The annual operating cost of an accelerator is about $5 million, and the management fees are far from covering these costs. It’s not a good business. You need to leverage your accelerated teams in a broader vision or in other ways. For us, this means building a DAO focused on creating something very unique.

When VCs have other priorities, such as managing large amounts of capital, they cannot focus all their attention on these teams. Their purpose in running an accelerator is to invest more money in Series A or B rounds. But when the focus is on that, it greatly impacts the teams joining the accelerator. If these teams do not receive follow-up investments or do not get Series A funding from these VCs, it essentially means they are "dead." Other VCs will question, "Why didn't your accelerator company receive follow-up investment? Don't they have follow-up funds?" This could be due to completely reasonable reasons, such as excessive industry exposure or a loss of confidence in a particular field, rather than being related to the team. But such impressions are usually dangerous. I think most VCs have no reason to operate accelerators.

Additionally, running an accelerator requires tremendous attention; for example, it needs 15 full-time employees, which most VCs do not have the capacity for. Reviewing 2000 applications requires a lot of work, so my advice is that the best VCs should focus on some founders emerging in the network and support them as available resources rather than trying to run an accelerator.

ChainCatcher: Besides online applications, do you have other sources for finding projects?

Will Robinson: All applicants must apply through our website; this is how we maintain order. But how they hear about Alliance or the website varies. More than half of the teams are referred by previous founders or alumni, who tell applicants, "Trust me, Alliance is worth your time." Most founders should be cautious about accelerator programs, as many accelerators are not worth the time. The best founders in the world know this. So to earn their trust, they need to hear recommendations from their peers. They need to be told by their colleagues, "These people are reliable." That’s why we have spent a long time building a large community of founders to spread the word and let everyone know we are different.

ChainCatcher: Why are founders afraid to join accelerators?

Will Robinson: Excellent founders typically do not go through accelerators because they already know how to build a company. The projects they are building may be overvalued, or they may choose to go to Y Combinator. Top founders know that most accelerators cannot provide the value needed compared to the dilution of equity they would have to give up. Therefore, it took Alliance a long time to get excellent founders to accept the conditions we required for applications. Building this trust requires word of mouth from multiple sources. As a great founder, you need to hear from two or three people that Alliance will do everything possible to help you succeed.

Some excellent founders are in the early stages of their careers, and accelerators can genuinely help them learn. But now Alliance is a well-known brand with a large community, and excellent founders are willing to give up dilution to sell their products to hundreds of alumni. Many of our teams' first customers are alumni of Alliance. This way, you can quickly launch your business and get feedback.

Secondly, the legitimacy and signal that Alliance brings are now very meaningful. You can gain a lot of marketing and exposure because you will be included in a series of recent success stories. I think this year we have Moonshot and Pump.Fun, along with many other consumer projects that are emerging. So if you are building a consumer application, Alliance will help more customers see your product, and people are willing to do so. If you are building SaaS or some kind of infrastructure, then you would want to join Alliance to sell your product to its founder community. These are two different reasons you might want to join.

Accelerators can be divided into two types: one is very boring, assembly-line-style guidance, such as how to register a company, implement HR practices, establish hiring processes, design websites, and marketing, or even more specialized cryptocurrency guidance, such as how to launch a token.

But Alliance does not do these things. We won’t tell you how to register a company or how to launch a token. We will tell you how to create products that people want to use. Finding product-market fit is very difficult. A typical accelerator's junior mentors cannot help you achieve that. But Alliance's mentors have been working in the crypto space for 8 to 15 years. These people are the ones who can truly help you find the right product for your target users.

ChainCatcher: You mentioned that investing in follow-up rounds can be harmful to projects. Do you sometimes invest in follow-up rounds?

Will Robinson: We never invest in follow-up rounds for the teams we accelerate. This way, venture capitalists cannot discern whether we have a bias. However, we do invest in follow-up rounds for teams we did not accelerate. For example, Arbitrum gave us an investment opportunity. We invested in Axie Infinity. We have many great strategic investments, but these do not fall within the scope of the accelerator's business.

Judging Founders and Teams

ChainCatcher: How do you view the balance between a founder's ability to pivot and their resilience?

Will Robinson: When we interview founders, we check several aspects. First, whether there is a strong collaborative relationship among the founders. If not, it means they may fail during the pivot process. So we place a lot of emphasis on finding people who have worked together for a while.

Another point we focus on is whether they have an obsession with succeeding at all costs. This is also very useful. We really do not like teams that are too large. This is a big issue for teams from Asia or Eastern Europe, where labor costs are lower, and people tend to hire quickly. However, large teams find it hard to pivot. So we strongly prefer small teams.

Typically, the first thing we do when a team joins Alliance is teach them how to downsize. If you have not found product-market fit, then you do not need that many employees. You need to focus on finding the right problem and the right solution. Some companies need a lot of employees to do this, but that is very rare. And that is not the type of company we excel at helping.

Y Combinator and OpenAI are a great example. OpenAI broke all the rules of Y Combinator. It does not look like a typical YC company. It has too many employees and has not had a clear product-market fit in 10 years. But it is one of the most valuable assets they have accelerated. So there are exceptions, and we will accept them. But generally speaking, if we want them to pivot, we need them to have strong motivation, solid collaborative relationships, and fewer employees.

Stardew Valley made over $100 million with just one developer. I am not here to create the next $2 billion Rockstar like GTA7. I think if we are going to develop games in the crypto space, it is better to focus on small teams.

Typically, the teams that come to us are often the largest because they come from the Web2 space, like the traditional gaming industry, where a large team is needed, and everyone is like a cog in a machine, quickly developing many different games. However, the usual result is that they end up slowing down all processes due to entering the crypto space, only slowly developing one game, and overemphasizing quality at the expense of quantity. If I am going to communicate with a game team, I want to hear that they released 20 games in a year, that they are constantly experimenting, even if the games may be rough, but they are looking for product-market fit.

We are now receiving many applications for AI-related projects. Many applicants proposing tokenized AI projects are centered around this theme, which excites me. I have always wanted to provide financial services to those who cannot access banking, but I did not expect that "those who cannot access banking" would be AI. I initially thought it was people in the Global South who could not access banking, but now I find that AI is also struggling with managing funds, and I am very hopeful to see crypto technology solve this issue for AI. For our alliance, the core interest is great founders; whatever they want to build, we are happy to build alongside them.

ChainCatcher: What do you think is the most interesting project currently?

Will Robinson: It is Pump.Fun because it has changed the way many people behave and has led to different thinking about meme coins. Another amazing project is Glow, as it incentivizes solar farm production in a very interesting way and performs exceptionally well. However, there are countless interesting projects, and I also enjoy being surprised.

In the first two months, we did not know that Pump.Fun would be a huge success. Initially, no one was using it, and we had to beg people to try it. It was one of those projects that started very slowly but then suddenly exploded. Many people thought it would quickly fade away, but that was not the case. It is still unclear where Pump.Fun will end up, and I enjoy thinking about what its ultimate game mode will be. Now we see other projects starting to use it as a platform to publish content, which also brings various issues, such as how to handle or whether to handle potential criminal behavior. And there are many interesting puzzles surrounding this team that occupy most of my thinking space.

When they joined us, they were developing an NFT trading platform called Caviar, which used some unique financial primitives to showcase its uniqueness. Although they had built a user base, it was still insufficient, so they tried some new things, but the team also split. One co-founder, Mohammed Bayoumi, left to establish Exo, a high-performing AI company.

The other two co-founders found new partners and began developing in other areas. At that time, they did not know what to develop, and we brainstormed with them. Imran, one of the co-founders of Alliance, was also the mentor who worked most closely with the Pump team. He researched Friend.tech with Chow and thought there might be some interesting things worth exploring or developing. Therefore, they began to study bond curves and speculation in the social media environment.

Despite the lack of appeal of Friend.tech and insufficient interest in their project, they learned how to launch a token at an extremely low cost (only 2 cents). This ultimately became a clear milestone for community members, helping to push the project forward.

I believe a key lesson in entrepreneurship is that you need to create lucky conditions for yourself. You need to work in the right direction, solving people's problems, while also hoping that some unexpected things will ultimately play a significant role. They gained many lessons through deep learning about users and consumers, continuously focusing on the consumer crypto space while constantly pivoting, which allowed them to gain domain expertise and ultimately discover something truly useful.

免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。