# Сопутствующие статьи по теме Product-Market Fit

Новостной центр HTX предлагает последние статьи и углубленный анализ по "Product-Market Fit", охватывающие рыночные тренды, новости проектов, развитие технологий и политику регулирования в криптоиндустрии.

a16z Partner: Three Paths for Crypto Projects to Find PMF

Author: Jason Rosenthal. Compiler: Shenchao TechFlow. Finding Product-Market Fit (PMF) is the most critical variable for a company's survival. In the crypto space, misaligned growth hacking and airdrops often mask the absence of true PMF. However, leading teams are now finding PMF faster. Here are three proven paths for crypto projects to achieve PMF: 1. **Co-build with Anchor Clients:** Partner with the most sophisticated potential clients in your field and develop the product based on their specific needs. Their adoption serves as the strongest validation, more valuable than media coverage or TVL metrics. This approach is shaping current product roadmaps, as seen in collaborations between crypto startups and traditional finance. 2. **Position Ahead of an Exponential Curve:** Identify and position yourself ahead of a major emerging trend before the market fully realizes it. The most evident current curve is the rise of AI Agents as autonomous economic actors. Projects like AgentCash by Merit Systems, which enables AI Agents to pay for API access with crypto, are building foundational payment rails for the impending Agent economy. 3. **Be Your Own First and Best Customer:** The most enduring infrastructure companies don't wait for external validation. They first build and prove their technology by using it to power their own applications at scale before offering it to others. Matter Labs exemplifies this by anchoring its ZKsync technology in a concrete application, Cari Network, which enables U.S. regional banks to conduct real-time, on-chain interbank transfers of tokenized deposits. The underlying logic is consistent: the fastest path to PMF involves choosing the right battlefield and executing with conviction—by co-building with clients whose validation compounds, positioning ahead of the curve before consensus forms, or becoming your own best case study.

marsbit06/09 02:11

a16z Partner: Three Paths for Crypto Projects to Find PMF

marsbit06/09 02:11

The Midlife Crisis of Crypto GPs: No PMF, No Next Check from LPs

The article "The Midlife Crisis of Crypto GPs: No PMF, No Next LP Check" analyzes the shifting crypto fundraising landscape. It argues the era of selling grand visions to LPs is over; GPs must now offer products with clear Product-Market Fit (PMF). The author categorizes crypto fundraising products into three types: Primary (VC funds), Liquid (trading strategies), and CeFi/DeFi Native Yield. This summary focuses on the Primary market. Key points include: * **Market Shift:** LPs are impatient, demand immediate returns, and are skeptical of future promises. The "easy money" narrative has faded. * **GP Value Erosion:** LP learning curves have shortened (aided by AI), reducing the value of a GP's basic "crypto knowledge." Superior judgment is now rare. * **Weakened LP Motivations:** Traditional reasons for LPs to invest in crypto VC funds (capturing industry beta, gaining access, leveraging GP judgment) have weakened due to new products like ETFs and increased LP sophistication. * **Surviving in Primary:** The primary market will likely persist for: 1) large funds in endowment mandates treating it as a lottery ticket, 2) family offices/HNWIs using proprietary capital, 3) a few funds with proven recent outperformance, and 4) funds with strong ecosystem "deal-making" capabilities. * **Conclusion:** For most GPs, rebuilding trust requires starting over in a niche, demonstrating alpha-generating ability, or providing concrete value/services to LPs.

marsbit06/01 14:24

The Midlife Crisis of Crypto GPs: No PMF, No Next Check from LPs

marsbit06/01 14:24

Crypto GPs' Midlife Crisis: No PMF, No LP's Next Check

The article "The Midlife Crisis of Crypto GPs: No PMF, No LP's Next Check" analyzes the shifting crypto fundraising landscape. It argues that the era of LPs funding vague "vision" is over; GPs must now offer products with clear Product-Market Fit (PMF) to secure capital. The market has matured. LPs, disillusioned by the last cycle's failures and wary of long lock-up periods, now demand tangible, near-term returns rather than speculative narratives. The proliferation of accessible crypto ETFs and other liquid products has reduced the need for VC blind pools as an entry point. The author categorizes crypto fundraising products into three types: Primary (VC funds, with blind pools or clear pipelines), Liquid (alpha/beta, directional/market-neutral strategies), and CeFi/DeFi Native Yield (crypto-specific mechanisms like staking, farming). Focusing on the Primary market, the piece details why traditional LP rationales for investing in crypto VCs have weakened: easier beta access via ETFs, diminished "access" and "judgement" premiums as LPs build internal teams, and a widespread lack of proven superior returns from GPs. Ultimately, only specific players are likely to remain at the primary VC table: large funds with access to patient endowment capital, family offices/HNWIs investing proprietary capital, the few funds with demonstrable excess returns from the last cycle, and those with clear "deal-making" or ecosystem resource advantages. For others, the path forward is to rebuild trust by proving alpha-generation capability in a niche or providing concrete, valuable services.

链捕手06/01 14:00

Crypto GPs' Midlife Crisis: No PMF, No LP's Next Check

链捕手06/01 14:00

Anthropic Major Release: "The Founder's Playbook" - All 4 Stages of Entrepreneurship, Completely Reimagined with AI

**Anthropic Releases "The Founder's Playbook," Reimagining the Four Stages of Startups with AI** The logic of entrepreneurship is being fundamentally reshaped by AI. Anthropic's new handbook, "The Founder's Playbook: Building an AI-Native Startup," defines the AI-native startup as a new species: not a traditional company with AI tools, but a venture driven by AI from day one. The founder's role is transforming from a hands-on builder to a conductor or architect, orchestrating AI agents for execution while focusing on high-level judgment and strategy. Anthropic outlines a product matrix of Claude tools for different tasks: Claude Chat for interactive research, Claude Code for generating production-ready code, and Claude Cowork for automating knowledge-intensive workflows. The handbook structures the startup lifecycle into four stages, detailing core goals, pitfalls, and AI applications for each: 1. **Idea Stage**: Focuses on validating a real problem. The core challenge is avoiding confirmation bias. AI practices include using Claude as a "structured devil's advocate" to challenge assumptions and for automated market/competitor research. 2. **MVP Stage**: Aims to gather early signals of Product-Market Fit (PMF). Key risks are technical debt and scope creep due to rapid AI-assisted development. Recommended AI uses include maintaining project memory documents (e.g., CLAUDE.md), using Claude Code for structured coding, and automating user feedback analysis. 3. **Launch Stage**: Centers on establishing scalable growth, operations, and compliance. Challenges include accelerating technical debt and founders becoming bottlenecks. AI should be used to build an "operating system" for launch—automating routine tasks (scheduling, reporting, content) and code audits—freeing founders for critical decisions. 4. **Scale Stage**: Focuses on achieving sustainable business operations. The main challenge is delegating operational control. AI should be leveraged for differentiated marketing, operational optimization, and building competitive moats through data network effects. The handbook concludes that in the AI era, "Can we build it?" is no longer the primary constraint. The advantage shifts back to foundational strengths: **insight, judgment, and a deep understanding of a specific problem and audience.**

marsbit05/22 13:58

Anthropic Major Release: "The Founder's Playbook" - All 4 Stages of Entrepreneurship, Completely Reimagined with AI

marsbit05/22 13:58

Fantasy's Closing Notes: After Two and a Half Years of Trial and Error in SocialFi, What Have We Learned?

"Fantasy Shutdown Notes: Two and a Half Years of SocialFi Trial, What Have We Learned?" Fantasy, a SocialFi/crypto card game, is shutting down. The team is refunding 100% of investments to angel/seed round backers, as operational costs were fully covered by revenue. Over 2.5 years, the project returned approximately $20M to its community. The core reason for failure was building crypto economics on a foundation not designed for it. Traditional card games (Magic, Pokémon) succeed by prioritizing gameplay; financial value is a secondary outcome. Crypto card games invert this, attracting speculators first, not genuine players. This financialization trapped the team into managing a financial instrument instead of developing a game. This is a sector-wide issue. Embedding tokenomics into social products or creator-fan relationships often attracts short-term traders over genuine users, undermining the core value. The article also critiques premature token launches. Most tokens fail because they're issued before product-market fit is proven, diverting team and community focus to price speculation instead of building. Successful examples like Hyperliquid or Jupiter built sustainable businesses first. Fantasy's journey highlights key crypto pitfalls: the distorting effect of upfront financialization in gaming/social apps, and the dangers of launching tokens too early. The team hopes sharing these lessons helps future builders avoid the same traps.

marsbit05/21 08:13

Fantasy's Closing Notes: After Two and a Half Years of Trial and Error in SocialFi, What Have We Learned?

marsbit05/21 08:13

How Should Crypto VCs Survive? When Top Projects No Longer Need Institutional Funding

Cryptocurrency venture capital is at a watershed moment. Token exits, once the primary driver of outsized returns, are undergoing a major reset. The definition of token value is being rewritten in real-time, yet no standard valuation framework has emerged. Key market shifts include the rise of tokens with real, on-chain revenue (like HYPE), which exposed the weakness of governance tokens with no fundamentals; a supply shock from meme coins (e.g., PUMP) fragmenting liquidity; and competition from prediction markets, stock perps, and leveraged ETFs diverting retail speculative capital. This has compressed token lifecycles and cratered holding periods. VCs now face critical questions: Are they underwriting equity, tokens, or a hybrid? What is the best practice for on-chain value accrual beyond potentially toxic buybacks? Will the "crypto premium" vanish entirely, forcing valuations to align with public equities and crashing many Layer 1 tokens? The result is a divergence: early-stage investors are becoming more price-sensitive on token projects, while appetite for equity deals is growing. Later-stage crypto VCs are increasingly competing with traditional funds in "Web2.5" deals. To survive, crypto VCs must find their product-market fit with founders. Capital alone is no longer sufficient. Winning the best deals—from projects that may not even need institutional funding—requires providing unmatched brand value and non-capital advantages.

marsbit04/13 04:08

How Should Crypto VCs Survive? When Top Projects No Longer Need Institutional Funding

marsbit04/13 04:08

a16z: The Best Technology Doesn't Always Win in the Enterprise Market

a16z: Why the "Best" Tech Doesn't Always Win in Enterprise Markets In the current blockchain application cycle, founders are learning a crucial lesson: enterprises don't buy the "best" technology; they buy the upgrade path with the least disruption. For decades, new enterprise tech has offered promises of order-of-magnitude improvements—faster settlement, lower costs, cleaner architecture—but adoption rarely matches technical superiority. The gap isn't performance but product-market fit. Enterprises prioritize minimizing downside risk over maximizing gains. Decision-makers in large institutions face asymmetric penalties: missing an opportunity is rarely punished, but a visible failure can damage careers and attract regulatory scrutiny. Thus, decisions are driven by "what is least likely to fail" rather than "what might be achieved." Enterprise decisions are made by a coalition of stakeholders—legal, compliance, risk, finance, security—each with veto power and different concerns. The "customer" is rarely a single buyer but a group focused on avoiding errors. Successful founders identify these decision-makers early and tailor their pitch to address specific institutional constraints. Third-party consultants and system integrators often act as gatekeepers, repackaging new technology into familiar frameworks to reduce perceived risk. Ignoring this layer is a strategic mistake. A common error is using a one-size-fits-all sales pitch or advocating for a "rip-and-replace" approach. Enterprises prefer incremental integration that complements existing systems, as seen in Uniswap's collaboration with BlackRock on tokenized funds, which extended traditional fund structures onto the chain without overhauling operations. Enterprises hedge their bets by running multiple pilots. Winning requires becoming the "right hedge"—not just through technical superiority but by demonstrating professionalism, predictability, and credibility within institutional constraints. Ideological purity around decentralization often fails to resonate with risk-averse enterprises. Success comes from adapting to the enterprise's operational realities, not demanding they adopt a full vision immediately. The most successful technologies are those that integrate seamlessly into existing workflows, reducing uncertainty and enabling gradual, scalable adoption.

marsbit03/11 09:43

a16z: The Best Technology Doesn't Always Win in the Enterprise Market

marsbit03/11 09:43

活动图片