Hey there, crypto enthusiasts! If you’ve been keeping an eye on the latest buzz in the blockchain world, you might have stumbled across an intriguing thread on X from @lbolord. Posted on July 4, 2025, this post dives deep into a hot topic: why venture capitalists (VCs) should ditch the traditional equity model and start buying tokens instead. As someone with a background at CoinDesk and now at Meme Insider, I’m excited to break this down for you in a way that’s easy to digest—especially if you’re into meme tokens or just curious about the future of crypto investing.

The Problem with Equity and Tokens Coexisting

So, what’s the big deal? According to @lbolord, when startups offer both equity and tokens, it creates a messy split. VCs often push for equity rounds even when they claim tokens are the future. This dual structure splits the company into two parts: the operating entity (with equity holders) and the token ecosystem. Imagine trying to juggle two different rulebooks—legal regimes, cap tables, and incentive systems all pulling in different directions. It’s a headache for founders and can confuse early token holders who see VCs getting a “privileged” deal.

For example, if a VC invests $500k in a startup with a token launch on a platform like Believe/metadao, they could buy tokens on the open market at a 5m-10m valuation and own 0.5-1% of the company. Sounds fair, right? But instead, they often opt for equity, leaving the token side dry. This means the operating entity gets cash, but the token—meant to drive the ecosystem—misses out. It’s like watering only half the garden!

Why Tokens Should Be the Default

Here’s where it gets interesting. @lbolord argues that forcing VCs to buy tokens on the open market levels the playing field. Crypto is all about liquidity and decentralization, so why stick with an illiquid equity class? When everyone—users, builders, and investors—plays by the same onchain rules, it builds trust. Plus, it aligns incentives: equity investors might push for an exit (like a buyout), while token holders care about long-term utility and liquidity.

Take a look at the replies to this thread. @heiss_7 shares that their project skipped equity entirely, letting a DAO LLC own the IP, and found investors receptive. This shows there’s a growing appetite for token-only models. It’s a clean path: launch the token fairly, allocate some for the team, and let VCs jump in like anyone else. No special treatment, just pure crypto logic.

The Downsides of the Status Quo

But let’s not sugarcoat it—sticking with equity has its downsides. Founders end up juggling two systems, which eats into their time for building products. Early token holders might lose confidence seeing VCs get a better deal. And the mismatch in goals—exits vs. utility—can create tension. @lbolord nails it: if VCs truly believe in crypto’s future, buying tokens upfront should be the default. It’s simple, transparent, and keeps the ecosystem united.

What This Means for Meme Tokens and Beyond

Now, if you’re into meme tokens (and hey, who isn’t at Meme Insider?), this shift could be a game-changer. Meme coins thrive on community hype and fair launches—think of projects like Dogecoin or Shiba Inu. A token-first approach could boost their legitimacy, attracting VCs who’d otherwise shy away from equity-heavy deals. It’s a chance to see more decentralized, community-driven projects take off, which aligns perfectly with the meme token spirit.

Final Thoughts

This thread from @lbolord isn’t just a hot take—it’s a call to rethink how we build and invest in crypto. By ditching privileged equity rounds and embracing tokens, we could see a more equitable, liquid, and innovative blockchain space. Whether you’re a VC, a founder, or just a meme token fan, it’s worth pondering: are we stuck in old habits, or ready to embrace the future? Drop your thoughts in the comments—I’d love to hear what you think!