Apex Fusion and Eternl Wallet - What is going on here? And why are we paying for this? Apex Fusion has made a very controversial CIP. Which leads to some questions. Who exactly is Apex Fusion? Right now, it looks like they fork Cardano and are a whitelabel Cardano reseller. Its not "oh its just a Cardano reseller", they are getting txn fees and there is no value accrual to Cardano holders. This is a problem Eternl Wallet. A closed source wallet. They are getting funds from Cardano holders from the big Intersect budget passed in 2025. Eternl wallet has an Apex Fusion integration letting people easily switch to their network. This is another problem. Why are we paying for this?

As for the acual CIP itself. Lot of discussion and some interesting points were brought up. Who else asked for Tachys? Besides Apex Fusion considering they are very sketchy with no transaction fees. To me, it looks like Apex Fusion needs some changes that benefit them and they put product development and maintenance cost on Cardano. There is no clear benefit to Cardano from this.

Also, DReps don't get a vote on CIP upgrades which is now an issue after watching technical people get hustled by a technical sales rep or tech influencer. Pure lip service, 0 txn fees. Actually negative txn fees considering they are taking Cardano activity. I mean something like this doesn't even reach DReps. It just the Cardano Foundation CIP review, gets implemented, becomes a hardfork, and then SPO's say yes. I think DReps need to also be involved and get a say in the technical upgrades.

Am I right? Let me know below.

Cardano Builder DAO CBDAO review - First and MOST IMPORTANTLY They are not a DAO or "builder" or whatever they calll themselves. They are another fund administrator like Intersect or Catalyst. Judge them as such. I don't know if they were confused on their own role or they were trying to confuse us by changing the words around. Neither sound very good

Some good and bad things they did. Good - Much better UI than Gov.Tools on the voting proposals. Its reddit style. Intersect could learn something from clarity.vote proposal format which you can see from cbdao.taptools.io.

Bad - Theres a lot of bad. Fund administrator Voting Process - Its not inclusive to ADA holders. To be able to vote, CBDAO has to consider you as a "builder" - they grant you a vote. This arbitrary designation of "builder" is just as bad as government licensing. In USA, you need a license to cut hair WILD. Scissors are the new nukes. If all the voters are "builders" who wins the proposal and gets funding - a "builder" or an "influencer"?

CB DAO members and supporters being rude - "You don't know anything about running an enterprise" lol. I would like to remind the Cardano community Iagon started in Ethereum but left because they couldn't get money. Once the money runs out in Cardano, they will migrate elsewhere. Additional funding for Iagon needs to be heavily scrutinized. We are essentially giving them free money to grow their business.

KPI - Metrics are being abused here. How were additional on-chain txn due to your funding decision? How does additional funding grow txns? Not existing txn that you were going to do anyway from previous funding or were due to market forces.

Ultimately, it really comes down to can they beat the Cardano masses in Catalyst. Catalyst is trying to become some masses voting platform either with ID or quadratic cubic voting on txn fees. Yes if masses are voting, decision making quality will be poor lol but thats the risk we take.

But can CBDAO's handpicked selection of "builder" voters do better than Intersect's or Catalyst's funding admin voter selection?

Let me know your thoughts below!

Heres my top 10 Catalyst Fund 15 proposals and why. Also a Catalyst improvement suggestion.

For Catalyst - Maybe they should do the quadratic cubic voting thing on txn count or txn fees for some time period instead of ADA amount. This can still be sybilled multi wallet but atleast they have to pay a lot of money. Attacker would probably do cost-benefit calculation if his excess txn fees would actually lead to winning proposals and be worth it.

1. SeaPort on Cardano: Processing Indian Port's 12M settlements https://projectcatalyst.io/funds/15/cardano-partners-tier-1-enterprise-integrations/seaport-on-cardano-processing-indian-ports-12m-settlements Team has executed successfully in past and is generating txn fees.

2. BIKEID-CHARLI3-SUPERIOR BikeID and Supply Chain data https://projectcatalyst.io/funds/15/cardano-partners-tier-1-enterprise-integrations/bikeid-charli3-superior-bikeid-and-supply-chain-data Conceptually similar to other projects that were successful and generating txn fees. There was another proposal last year by NMKR to put cars on Cardano and we missed it so lets not miss this.

3. Ethereum → Cardano Stablecoin Bridge: USDC & USDT → USDM https://projectcatalyst.io/funds/15/cardano-use-cases-prototype-and-launch/ethereum-cardano-stablecoin-bridge-usdc-and-usdt-usdm Converts USDT to Cardano Native Token. Bridges to bigger markets are good.

4.Cardano Global Orderbook https://projectcatalyst.io/funds/15/cardano-use-cases-prototype-and-launch/cardano-global-orderbook Better DeFi = More volume = more txn = more txn fees

5. Bodega Market V4 - Central Limit Order Book (CLOB) https://projectcatalyst.io/funds/15/cardano-use-cases-prototype-and-launch/bodega-market-v4-central-limit-order-book-clob They've done lots of txns and this will help them do more txn by making more competitive markets. Becomes competitive with Kalshi and Polymarket.

6. SteelSwap: Global Batcher https://projectcatalyst.io/funds/15/cardano-use-cases-prototype-and-launch/steelswap-global-batcher More efficient DeFi. More txn fees.

7. HydroX: A Stablecoin-Based Perpetual DEX on Cardano. https://projectcatalyst.io/funds/15/cardano-use-cases-prototype-and-launch/hydrox-a-stablecoin-based-perpetual-dex-on-cardano No alternative to Strike exists. Also code is open source unlike Strike.

8. Real-Estate Identity & Tokenization DApp on Midnight https://projectcatalyst.io/funds/15/midnight-compact-dapps/real-estate-identity-and-tokenization-dapp-on-midnight This is a real problem. People talk, Landlords are people. Landlord only needs to know you have enough to pay him and not all your financial information. For example, see IRS employee released Trump's tax records.

9. MLabs FeesaSwap: Wallet & dApp Ready ADA-less Tx Fees https://projectcatalyst.io/funds/15/cardano-use-cases-prototype-and-launch/mlabs-feesaswap-wallet-and-dapp-ready-ada-less-tx-fees Don't need to have ADA in your wallet to transact. Could be very useful to some people. Also already up. https://www.feesaswap.io/

10. Cardano’s $10T Institutional RWA Tokenization Infrastructure https://projectcatalyst.io/funds/15/cardano-partners-tier-1-enterprise-integrations/cardanos-dollar10t-institutional-rwa-tokenization-infrastructure First to use CIP-113 programmable tokens for compliant equity tokenization(stocks) on Cardano.

I will not be able to vote because I am not downloading the app so please vote on my behalf.

What are some of your favorite Catalyst proposals?

NCL is largely irrelevant. Focus needs to be making good investments. Saying yes and no - probably a lot more No than Yes. If every deal is good(in theory), then it makes sense to go over the limit. Return on invesment. Things new capabilities, time saved, more efficiency, more txn fees matter a lot more. Delegate to me at Rich King

Before debating the amount, the NCL period itself should be unified. Overlapping NCLs reduce governance clarity and predictability.

I would advise DReps to listen to the Intersect CBC twitter space:

https://x.com/IntersectCBC/status/2008917167471829196?s=20

Pretty good discussion there. Essentially, different points of view - but I do agree that the NCL is a bit of performative theater that the constitution mandates. It does introduce a bit of additional red tape into our entire governance model.

I may have my opinions on it and treasury management and withdrawals, but now one year into governance - I no longer have a fighting dog in the NCL fight itself. As DReps will override any limit - when and if they decide they want to override it. It's a signalling theater.

The real discussions will be about making solid, smart, valuable allocations from the Treasury in the months ahead and rejecting those that are not good enough. There might be few good Treasury allocation opportunities, or more than we expect. We can't see it from where we are standing.

My personal preference would have been an NCL that represents approximately 99% of the Net Income available from the inflows during the preceding period of the same length. Not the 120% that this NCL action proposes.

But, I will not block an NCL, as it is just a line in the sand in the middle of a very windy desert thta faces winds from many sides.

Still, pointing out that it is very very very unlikely that I will vote for 350 million ADA in disbursements. I was learning on the job in 2025. I will probably be looking at being more restrictive in 2026 than what I was in 2025 and certainly more restrictive in spending than the majority of DReps by voting power was in the previous year.

As a DRep I will not be guided by this NCL as a target even if it is approved. It is essentially meaningless in a few months, when the workd changes.

I will seek to approve only proposals that have a chance of bringing value to Cardano long-term and I will try to identify them to the best of my abilities.

So, my intent is to have an NCL that indicates slightly less than 100% of the Net Income available - if the intent is to signal 120% I will actively abstain.