Dev Fund vs. Actual Needs

With all of the dev fund talk, has anyone considered having ECC, ZF and ZCG put forth possible budgets for what they think they would need over the next 4-year cycle and then evaluate a funding strategy based on that? Seems like everything to date is X% based on some very subjective approaches. ZCG already kind of does this with their dashboard, but I really would like to see ECC and ZF say ok assuming the coin is at $30 (example), we would need this percent slice to cover our operational costs. At least then we’d have some line in the sand to work with. Be conservative with everything.


I agree. I tried really hard to get this but wasn’t able to get anyone to put there name to anything. I did this about a year ago so it’s already outdated. I shared this doc around with people privately and did get feedback so it shouldn’t be completely useless. It’s not 100% accurate or complete but at least it’s something I was able to roughly base my proposals on. (Tip: if the formatting is off like in a phone put it in print view :blush:)

When I tried to calculate this about a year ago the whole ecosystem would cost ~$60m from start of 2024 to end of 2028. This would mean if we continued the 20% Dev fund post halving the ecosystem would be short about $20m assuming a conservative 30% increase in the ZEC price each year. The document and calculations are now outdated and doesn’t include things like QEDIT’s latest proposal etc but it’s useful for me as a rough guide.


To be clear my proposal is based on my estimates above, real USD based funding requirements from each organisation. But I believe I’m the only one to have done this to date.


The concerning part here is that most organizations do this as part of a regular budget cycle. I don’t understand why these orgs can’t do the same thing.