Lots to like about this announcement and it clarifies that Brinc are managing the 50 companies incubated through Zeroth.
Difficult to judge the scale of the program, but based on the number of mentors/partners involved, I'd expect a minimum of 10 projects and potentially 25+.
The cash support of up to US$500k is also generous in comparison to other programs (which typically focus on in-kind support), although very few projects, if any, will get the full allocation. Animoca/Brinc are likely to be seeking around one-third equity/token share in most cases and circa 12.5%+ for the most advanced projects.
It's high risk, but also very high reward. We're now in a fortunate position, because even if they burn through US$15m and generate zero return, it's not terminal (they have the financial flexibility to take substantial calculated risks). It's much more likely that this program will generate a high ROI, probably much higher than the ROI from developing games.
For these reasons, I'd prefer Animoca to invest the majority of the capital raise proceeds in business incubation, early-stage investments and associated development funding, and complimentary acquisitions that leverage existing capabilities (TSB being a great example). This is what they do best and their track-record to date is impressive.
I'm much less convinced by Animoca as an in-house developer of games. They don't have any competitive advantage (very few game studios do). Their track-record is pretty average, rather than stellar. Whereas, they do appear to be much more successful at identifying a good game/project, acquiring it, using their in-house skills/knowledge to make it better, and exploiting their infrastructure/networks/media channels to promote it.
Why not focus on their strengths?
In a little under 18 months from delisting, our shares have increased from 18c to 110c - 511%. 340% annualised is a great return, but if you go through the list of companies that Animoca has invested in, a meaningful selection has become 15-50+ baggers. If Animoca had built material stakes across all of these companies (even at the direct expense of developing games in-house), then our shares would most likely be worth several times what they are now.
Do any of the in-house games (e.g. REVV ecosystem, TOWER etc) have the potential to be blockbusters?
Expand
