Fundamental Labs - DAO Partner Program

Proposal overview

This proposal is an extension of the DAO Partner Program proposal (submitted Oct. 1st 2021). We propose to add the below partners to batch #1 of the program.


The success of the SSV.Network depends on its community, currently composed of highly technical and experienced individuals from the ethereum community.

The motivation behind this proposal is to enlarge the community by engaging, via SSV token ownership, with strategic companies (partners) from the ethereum staking industry.

We believe that together we can bootstrap ssv.Network with experienced operators, their communities and eventually mainnet ETH.


The DAO Partner Program was designed to accommodate continuous introduction of new DAO Partners over the course of 6 months. The partners will be subjected to the terms specified in the Genesis Proposal.

Fundamental Labs is proposing to purchase 40387.72 SSV tokens (for ETH or USDC) at the batch 1 reference price of 6.19 USD per 1 SSV.


We’re excited about the vision of the SSV network team and wish to provide the DAO with the resources it needs to become the largest and most technically robust ETH validator. With the partnerships and experience we bring after having been venture investors in the space since 2016, we have full conviction we can help take SSV to the next level.

About us

Fundamental Labs was founded in 2016 and has been investing heavily in the cryptoasset space since. We work closely with our portfolio projects to give them the resources and partners they need to fulfill their vision. We also have 2 sister companies IDEG and Atlas Mining, which provide many synergies for our portfolio projects that have proved invaluable.

1 Like

I think this proposal is too late for batch 1. You are welcome to modify this for batch 2 though.

If you choose to do that, I would improve this a bit. Everyone keeps copying and pasting the motivation section from the original Partnership Program proposal, which isn’t necessary. Just include the one that you wrote. I would also like you to expand your description of your companies and the specific ways they are able to contribute beyond simply providing funding. Your website says very little and lists no individuals. Are you offering connections that the project doesn’t have? Will you be migrating validators to SSV? Will you be running an operator? Will you help with marketing or direct additional funds towards SSV?

There are many funders that are trying to become partners. You need to convince the community that you will add a significant amount of value to the project.


I think there is some misunderstanding about the initial proposal. We will modify the proposal and move to batch 2.

I have to say, the whole procedure is not clear. If you want the community be more active, pls do more to improve the transparency and welcome all the partners who want to support SSV.

Never bring bureaucracy to a new community. A good community should be a open and easy to play.We embrace the culture of decentralized community. It should provide unilimted access, not a VIP club.

Fundamental Labs has invested to more than 100 portfolios in crypto, including coinbase, binance Cannan, Polkdot, Avalanch and etc. We are running our 5th fund since 2016. We are quite, because we don’t have too much time to talk.

Besides, we are an all weather investor in crypto ecosystem. We are running one of the biggest infrastructure for bitcoin hash computing ( pls google Atlas mining), And we have a very strong trading arm( pls check the website . We launched the first bitcoin Trust in Asia and the first mining trust in the world. We connect the mainstream capital to the crypto economy.

We are willing to run an operator if we think SSV‘s governance is fair and transparent. We have experience and resource to help with the marketing and bring more other funds if we think SSV is worth to be recommended.

We never try to convince anyone, it’s a community you left your footprint and to be a real yourself.
Be humble, and be real.


It’s ok. I was just trying to help you represent yourselves the best that you can. I know the process is open-ended, and it’s not completely clear what some of us are expecting. That’s the purpose of this forum and the reason you can edit the proposal before submitting it for a vote. My comments were not meant as a rejection (besides just observing that you were too late for batch 1). Sorry if I came off too harshly. I’ve made similar comments on other proposals as well.

However, note that it’s important to the community to hear what you have to offer. And I appreciate that you wrote more. The primary purpose of these token sales is to create partnerships with groups that will help the project. The money is secondary.

Because of this, I think it reflects poorly on potential partners that aren’t willing to even write an introduction and basic argument for themselves. In my opinion, the bar is very low. We’re not asking for pages of paperwork to be filled out or for you to give us a powerpoint presentation. We’re only asking that you write two or three paragraphs describing who you are and what value you can add to this project. If someone isn’t willing to do that, then how can we trust that they’ll do anything else for this project?

With that said, feel free to reach out to the community for additional feedback or assistance with writing. We’re always happy to help. And to anyone else reading this that will be submitting a proposal in the future, feel free to contact me personally.

1 Like

@fundamentallabs thank you for the expanded overview!