Kaito here! Appreciate the notes Fig, and addressing a few of the comments here:
My concern is not about the team’s ability to execute, nor the value of this integration, (big fan of SAFE tooling & apps) but instead how this contradicts “Best Practices” as outlined in this post.
This makes sense, and we definitely recognize + acknowledge this best practice. We believe that our value proposition of distribution given our user base + the new opportunity for 0x protocol to reach a new customer segment justifies for this grant request, regardless of our funding status. We’re happy to discuss this transparently, and have also outlined our current metrics so the community gets a good understanding of our product + company.
It may be worth waiting for the community to further evaluate the parameters set in this fresh proposal before properly judging Utopia’s ask.
For sure - we’d be happy to contribute to the status of the parameters and discuss this. My general take is that there could be a clear distinction between indie developers + more formal company/labs requests, as I think there’s a clear value proposition for both types of builders! We also want to acknowledge that centralized startups/companies like ourselves should not be “extracting” a majority of the grants distributions + disbursements. Given the amount, we believe that 50k USD worth of the native ZRX token is also a fair value.
Independent of this, it feels like a thorough, well-written application. Some aspects which I enjoy:
- Clearly defined goals and dates → greater ability to judge the efficacy of the Grants
- Transparency and honesty → leading to more trust within the team
- Numbers and dashboards → can be used to audit the growth and usage, greater comps
Appreciate this - we’ll also be doing accountability reports in regard to our metrics + KPI’s as we go here in the context of our integration 
If there’s any other metrics that the community wants to see, happy to discuss this!