Associates are people who have risen to a degree of competence within the various technology / business / market areas that cover the projects and disclosures in the system. They join us through the www.labtoipo.com website and we advertise for them from time to time through social media.
You can register as an associate through the www.labtoipo.com website where your details are recorded and background experience and knowledge documented. You will need to have deep domain knowledge and/or significant business experience and/or significant financial experience to qualify as an associate. Once registered on the PIPE Associate Network (PAN) you will be matched with specific research projects that are being disclosed to the platform and you will be invited to validate and provide feedback on these, specific projects along with other domain experts.
We try to match the skills of an associate to the skill requirements of a project. The closer in depth that the match is, the more likely the associate will be appropriate for the project. We recognise that the taxonomy may not be interpreted the same way by an associate as it is by a project, and that due to the leading edge nature of the projects, they will be creating new taxonomy definitions that no one else may have or even thought of. We can however match from general down to very specific and identify associates who may have appropriate expertise, and may even have to add the new term to their own skill set.
In reviews the degree of match is also a potential weighting factor to the review given.
Your acceptance into a project is down to the Project Lead inviting you into the project. In order to be eligible you will need to have already qualified as a PAN member by passing AML/KYC and signing the Base NDA that covers all activity within the system. You will then be asked to digitally sign a Project NDA in the same way that you were asked to sign your Base NDA, and become available for the Project Lead to then read you into the project.
This ensures that you are covered by an NDA appropriate to the project before you have access to it, and that the control of such access is in the hands of the Project.
The system is built around an assess security layer that identifies individual logins and the actions that they take. If the login can be tied back to a person, then the tracking exists to establish if an individual has seen the subject title of, the detail of, or submitted a review to a disclosure. In the same way it can show that an individual has not seen the title of, or the detail of a disclosure.
This is an outcome of the systems auditing functionality that helps us to see what the level of engagement with a disclosure is, i.e. for every x people seeing the title how many could be bothered to look at the content, and for those looking at the content how many started or completed a review.
Each deliverable required of a project will have to have been reviewed and passed before it can be considered to have been completed and delivered. At the end of various stages within the QED process there are audit points whereby the responsibility for having checked that the deliverables required up to that point is accepted by signatories of the audit point. In the event of a late change to a deliverable any audit points that may have covered that deliverable are subsequently invalidated and require re-signature. This process continues through to the point where the submission to the IIC is made and the IIC signs off on the Funding Schedule.
From there the PC is delivering the additional steps of the QED process in order to reach the specified KPIs identified as trigger points for release of the reserved funds in the Funding Schedule. Attainment of these KPIs invariably involves a sign off from the officers of the PC to the effect that the KPI has been achieved and a warranting countersignature from a PIPE Board Observer that this is the case.
Initially all such Statements of Fact will be lodged on the consensus service of the DLT to become a part of the public record.
All Protégé Companies are expected to adhere to a recognised standard of accounting and audit that can be easily compared and is open to scrutiny. Our partner firm for independent auditing generally is KPMG.
The DAI (Decentralised Autonomous Investor) is in a privileged position as those creating a DAI will already be members of the PIPE Platform, will have passed KYC/AML and will be already active in their specific community with secured "sweat equity". This enables them to participate fully on the PIPE Platform without directly investing into either the PGF or the gDAO.
A Disclosure is a document that describes an idea / project / invention in such a way as no NOT give away any of the core IP involved but DOES give a fair idea of what the idea is about and how it might be useful. A Disclosure usually already has a sponsor (the host university of the researchers involved) and is a serious step along the way to getting the idea implemented.
Disclosures are reviewed by PIPE Associates who will themselves be either familiar with the specific technology area or the market that it addresses, such that they can give a reasoned appraisal of the opportunities that the disclosure presents for the development of a Protégé Company, a Licensing process or a Joint Venture. As can be expected not every Disclosure is going to get the universal approval that its authors may have anticipated, but even those that do not may still have a future. It may be that the time is not yet ripe for the proposition, and a few more pieces need to fall into place before revisiting the proposal.
At the moment the system is focusing on University and research group originated (sponsored) disclosures from the European geographic and political region. This does not imply that a non-University disclosure will be rejected out of hand, but it may require additional input from an academic source (university researcher) to ensure that it is up to the expected standards of the disclosures and review system.
Most disclosures will already have a sponsor (the hosting university or research group), but some may originate from individual researchers or non-academic sources. In those cases a Sponsor will be required to take the role usually held by the university, i.e. paying some of the bills. A Disclosure can expose that it requires a sponsor, and may be able to go through the entire review process and in theory be acceptable as a project to be developed into a Protégé Company, before such time as a sponsor steps forward. Under certain (currently exceptional) circumstances, PIPE may allow a disclosure to go forward without charge, if it is seen to be a particularly worthy outcome it is attempting to achieve, or a particularly profitable one. In the later case however sponsors will probably be queuing up to take on the project.
Disclosures to have to be visible for at least 30 days, or until it has received its threshold number of qualified reviewers before any meaningful determination could be made.
Only fully registered members of the platform are allowed to review a disclosure. Ideally a quorum of reviewers whose skill profile closely matches the skill requirements profile of the disclosure will be available within the existing PAN membership. If not it is PIPEs responsibility (with any help readily accepted) to identify and invite other individuals into the system so that they can participate in the review process. Restriction of the reviewers to nominated sets of PAN members is a possibility but not encouraged as it is not desirable to either intentionally or accidentally create a bias of review outcome and to exclude feedback that may be either positive or negative.
If as an author you think that the final outcome, after having taken into account all of the feedback and adjusting the disclosure to resolve any misconceptions or unclear aspects, is still incorrect, your first port of call is your sponsoring university or research group. Your Technology Transfer Office (TTO) or equivalent will have within their power the ability to accept or ignore the review conclusions, or to impose conditions upon the response given. If you can find a sponsor willing to take you forward then, unless the review outcome was a complete rejection, PIPE will be willing to help. Be warned however that the rejection reasoning will have to be resolved somewhere along the pathway towards investment, and before acceptance into the exchange. Sometimes the rejection reasoning may be a matter of timing. The solution proposed may be to a problem that has now been obsoleted, you missed the window of opportunity, or the solution would work if the marketplace had reached a specific level of awareness of the issue, or an underlying supporting technology / infrastructure outside the control of the project would need to be in place for the project to be viable. e.g. mobile phone apps require mobile phones, networks, network coverage etc.
The outcome of a review is the sum of the individual reviewers. The only single reviewer who has any influence is the final collator of the summary, and the bias at this point is slightly more positive than negative. The factual evidence however cannot be adjusted by anyone other than the individual reviewers passing their judgements. For this reason alone, it is important that the Disclosure Author, looks at and responds to any negative feedback in a prompt and appropriate manner. A simple assumption that the reviewer will make a specific connection between things, or that the way the commercial world operates supports the process, could undermine the disclosure review outcome. Ideally NO question on the Disclosure form should have a negative average (That's a RED FLAG) and VERY FEW if any should have anyone who has marked the question negatively (that's a warning card). If that can be achieved then it is down to levels of good, and the comparative levels for the disclosures that a sponsor is looking to take forward.
Unless the outcome of the original was a full house of red flags, resubmitting the disclosure at a later point, with changes to reflect the further work done and resolutions to the comments made, is not only possible but encouraged. If the original review felt that the time had not yet come, maybe now it has.
Any disclosure that is made and not carried forward remains dormant upon the system, usually in a 'withdrawn' status, and can be updated and reactivated by its authors at any point.
The disclosure validation reporting system allows for the identification of reviews authors. This allows the filtering of friendly or hostile sources as well as the identification of constant outliers across multiple disclosures. At the end of the day the disclosure authors and their sponsors have to be happy that the reviews included are pertinent, and if they choose to exclude objections they are likely to find that the subsequent QED process is a lot harder to complete.
PIPE is cited as a signatory party to both the BASE NDA and the PROJECT NDA. PIPES acceptance of the NDA is through its generation as an NDA to be signed and its loading into the system as a signed NDA and being accepted as such for permissions to proceed.
PIPE is therefore bound to an NDA with the Author(s) of the Disclosure and subsequent Projects through the process of accepting the Author as a PAN member
The front door of the system is not the only place that checks are run. Access to projects requires a signed PROJECT NDA that should precede the Project leader bringing the individual into the project.
Disclosure of IP comes in two forms
1: Protected IP. Information about patents provided during the disclosure & validation has value to the disclosing party, assuming they wish to be made aware of competing IP i.e. to know that a preceding patent exists saves time & money.
2: Unprotected IP. Information as to unprotected IP should not under any circumstances be exposed to anyone who is not covered by at the minimum a BASE NDA and willing to see the IP with the agreement explicit or implicit of its authors, or covered by BOTH a BASE NDA and a PROJECT SPECIFIC NDA and brought into a project team by the project lead.
Disclosing IP is the responsibility of the AUTHOR of the disclosure and is STRONGLY DISCOURAGED.
Authors should be aware that:-
1: The title of the Disclosure should be enough to be able to elicit interest but should not give away any IP in itself and that the Author gives permission for the Disclosure Title to be displayed as a minimum to all potential reviewers, even if they should decline to review for a potential conflict of interest.
2: The purpose of the Disclosure is to disclose information short of revealing IP and that it is the authors responsibility to ensure that this is done so.
3: PIPE only shares information as supplied by the author and in accordance with the NDAs that have been signed. i.e. PIPE is also bound by the BASE NDA to treat information as confidential and not to expose it outside of the agreements signed. As at this point NO IP should be present on the PIPE system for a disclosure the scope for accidental or deliberate exposure is very limited.
We treat all client information in the strictest confidence, hence our requirements for AML /KYC qualification of reviewers and PAN members engaged in processes and the general and project specific NDAs that are involved.
We aim to treat all disclosures and projects fairly without discrimination for any characteristic of authorship and apply the same standards of qualification to all.
The same standards of evidence apply to all, this means that regardless of reputation or lack of, a disclosure must be able to stand on its own merit. It is expected that those with the greater experience will be capable of creating such disclosures with greater ease and a greater probability of success by generating disclosures and projects of a higher quality and a high standard of evidence, not an assumption of correctness. This is one reason why we do not disclose the authorship of a disclosure initially.
Any project whose aim is to defraud would be rejected, though it could merit a thorough examination in order to determine appropriate countermeasures
A project which victimised individuals, communities or groups, either deliberately or as a by product would not be acceptable.
A project that displayed a blatant disregard for the side effects of its implementation would fail at several points through the system
A project based upon the exploitation of individuals, communities or groups, without an equally strong reward mechanism for those exploited would not be acceptable, and would fail at several points through the system.
Whilst it might be assumed that the projects to reach Disclosure and later Project status will have been developed under appropriate ethical guidelines by the project sponsor and researchers involved, this does not mean that the system does not bear a responsibility to ensure that the eventual outcome of the project that is supported meets appropriate ethical guidelines. The difficulty is always going to be agreeing the guidelines that are appropriate
As a rule, None.
It is our responsibility to provide a level playing field for disclosures and projects for the benefit of all involved, and not to give undue advantage to any.
If as an associate or author you have already managed to successfully negotiate the QED pathway for a number of previous projects, then the odds are that if you apply the same effort, and the project is equally worthwhile, then you will manage to do the same for the next project. Every project is measured on its own merits, and whilst your involvement may increase its probability of success, no dispensation is available to the project just because you are involved. Remember Thomas Eddison had 1000's of failed attempts before he managed to light the bulb.
The European paradox is the perceived failure of European countries to translate scientific advances into marketable innovations. Wikipedia. Basically it means a lot of money goes into the process for very little benefit coming out (compared to other countries)
Basic model:
We run a platform that helps European university & research groups R&D generated IP and ideas become commercial reality. We charge the University Tech Transfer office and/or commercialisation teams for the services, take equity and a secure 20% success fee on exit. Like any investor we make our money out of ideas that work, not out of the also-rans. Where we are different is we deal with ideas coming out of universities, (or seek university validation for other sources), and run a systematic qualification, evaluation, due diligence and QA process for the lifetime of the project.
We give the project the best shot it can have, we want it to succeed, but we are not afraid to suggest that a project pivot onto something more useful, because we do not want to carry a large % of non-finishers within the funding. i.e. We WANT to fund it, but it NEEDS to be up to standard.
Our process takes an idea from initial disclosure, through the product development, commercial validation, business plan generation and investment committee, to launch as a tokenised investment on our exchange, where it can draw down allocatted funds as their KPIs are attained. As a by-product investors can trade and adjust their portfolios at this stage, and are never locked into an investment if they can find someone to trade them out.
The Lab to IPO Pathway is a comprehensive, methodical approach to the creation of a viable business plan for a new Protégé Company being formed. It aims to create a level playing field for diverse projects from diverse origins, such that they can be evaluated side by side in a meaningful way and invested in with a confidence.
The PIPE Platform and Lab to IPO Pathway is extremely proficient at identifying high growth/high value projects and through a combination of people, process and technology can ascertain which opportunities should be commercialised. However a ‘good’ project is one that creates impact and this can be recorded financially, ethically, environmentally and societally. The projects that successfully navigate the PIPE Platform QED and system gates and are put forward for funding are, by that fact, ‘good’ however, the funding is ONLY secured IF the PGF DAO and/or xx-DAO allow the investment to progress. Some xx-DAO may well value certain projects over others and some xx-DAO may be more aligned with environmental outcomes than financial ones, all of which is ‘good’.
The PIPE Platform and Lab to IPO Pathway addresses a number of issues in one solution, all of which have been addressed individually at other times. The ‘pinch point’ at university and research level relating to the number of project disclosures versus the number of ‘experts’ able to appraise them drives the need for a systematic process. The lack of visibility and the very early stage of projects, coupled with the significant need for robust due diligence puts off investors. The lack of a management team and significant financial upsides, as well as the nascent technology puts of venture capitalists. The European Paradox puts off governments and institutions. The PIPE Platform and Lab to IPO Pathway addresses ALL these issues and others directly AND is seeking to enable a new generation of investors and beneficiaries through the use of novel technology, specifically the blockchain and tokenisation of the economics. This should have been done before, but the technology didn’t exist, the appetite didn’t exist and nobody else had the global vision of PIPE. Now is a good time….
In the majority of cases they come from ideas that have been born out of the research done by university academics and researchers. As a result we can be reassured that the underlying science of the project has a much firmer base than a project coming in from the outside or private start up companies. This is why our projects perform 4 x better than their peers.
This is the kernel of the PIPE Platform and Lab to IPO Pathway which has taken many years to develop, evolve, improve and automate. The original underlying methodology was first documented in 2012 and used as a manual process between then and 2015/16 at a number of universities and research groups. What is now known as QED can ONLY work efficiently when combined with the DLT as it is the inherent trust and immutability within the system that assures investors and project owners alike. The standardisation of the QED process and the use of DLT, as well as the unique reporting, means ANY project from ANY area can be disclosed and validated on a like-for-like basis. This is unique to PIPE.
As a project on its way to hopefully becoming a Protégé Company, you will initially interact with a PIPE Project Co-ordinator who is responsible for seeing that things get done and the project progresses along the pathway. Over time the number of people will increase as professional associates come on board to the project team, additional resources are drafted in for certain stages of the pathway, and the Protégé Company starts to shake out and fill the various positions identified as needed at each stage. Meanwhile in the background the PIPE Project Co-ordinator will be facilitating the progression and liaising between all of the parties involved to ensure a smooth passage into the IIC and hopefully to Protégé Company status beyond that. At that point the Protégé Company will be assigned an agreed PIPE Board representative to monitor the further progress of the Protégé Company and take part in the scheduling of the funds being released. We hope that once you are up to speed and running fully, that you do not forget us and remain a part of the system, helping the next wave of Protégé Companies through with the expertise that you have picked up along the way, or by investing in their future directly.
The PIPE Platform and Lab to IPO Pathway has within it numerous stage-gates and checkpoints managed by the QED system. There are five key stages known as Disclosure & Validation, Evaluation, Launch, Fund and List. Each one has a number of stage-gates and checkpoints that MUST be completed (in full or in part) and from which a gap analysis and risk register is driven. Each stage MUST be addressed, approved and signed-off by the QED system and the quality of each stage is scored by the system. At the end of each stage there is a Go/No GO decision point before the project can move forward. The process is iterative, automated and collaborative with the underlying tools measuring associated risk and value, whilst recording tasks for the future technical and business operational roadmaps and, ultimately the investment schedule. All of this is supported by PIPE Associates, staff and researchers.
As a project you get the funding upon agreement of theIndependent Investment Committee (IIC) that you have fulfilled the requirements of the pathway and have a business plan that will take you the rest of the way, fulfilling the KPIs identified and releasing funds set aside for you. In other words you work your way along the pathway until it is talking about things that you need to plan for rather than have done already. You formulate the plans for the additional stages and present them to the IIC as a part of your business plan. You get agreement from the IIC that the plans are good, and a funding schedule is put in place for commencement in 30 days. If no red flags are raised within that 30 day period and there is sufficient preference and / or liquidity within the PGF and the funds put aside for release through the funding schedule. You are on your way. You now need to satisfy the release conditions of the funding schedule, each one of which will release a proportion of the funds agreed. Note: Unless there is a drastic change in circumstances, the funding is made available to you when you satisfy the pre-agreed conditions. No additional conditions can be added or subtracted without the formal agreement of the IIC and a new schedule being put in place.
Get involved, join as an associate, register your skills and interests, watch out for disclosures that you can contribute to, get involved in a project and help it to progress. Apply your expertise to help a project along the pathway.
As an associate what you earn depends upon what level of involvement you commit to and achieve within specific projects. As a guideline your involvement is expected to accrue "sweat equity" within a project that can be translated subsequently to tokens in the project . You may be asked to stay on within a Protégé Company as a full or part time employee, or on a consultancy basis, depending on what it is you are adding to the project, or you may be approached by a maturing Protégé Company to take up a role there.
It is expected that some associates will prefer to operate with Protégé Companies as they are going through specific stages of the pathway, and that others will want to be in for the long term. The system should support either approach to engagement.
PIPE maintains an observer position on the board of Protégé Companies in order to track their progress along the remaining QED pathway, and their achievement of KPIs which release funds from the funding schedule agreed by the IIC.
A Protégé Company is a matured project that has passed the IIC review and been granted a listing on the PIPE Exchange and a Funding Schedule. It may have reached a high level of Technical Readiness or still be at the lower stages with adequate plans for how it will progress. All Protégé Companies are likely to be still completing parts of the PIPE Pathway and having funds released on attainment of key deliverables within that pathway that have been set as the KPIs that trigger the Funding Schedule.
The creation of an increasing number of Protégé Companies through the pathway will give rise to the constant need to resource these companies with everything that a new company needs, from payroll systems and offices, to legal assistance and HR. The Pipe Company does not intend to try to offer these services, but to create an environment where they are available from known and trusted partners who offer favourable terms to the new companies as they grow.
For the PIPE Company, patient investment is money provided to the Protégé Company in tranches against KPIs and delivered when needed over whatever length of time required. These funds are provided against published milestones and therefore the ‘patient’ in patient investment relates to the timing of the delivery of funds coupled with the period of time over which investment is made. Essentially, we have to be patient and allow the roadmap to drive funding and outcomes.
We use digital signatures across the system and a certificate helps us to assure that the user we recognise as X is using the certificate owned by X and has the authority to operate of X.
There is a Base NDA which at core covers all disclosures of information made and behaviour within the system. In addition there will usually be a Project Specific NDA that will be applicable if you become more closely involved with a specific project.
If you are found to be in breach of an NDA, then the outcome may range from suspension of activity to prosecution for IP infringement.
If you do not wish to sign an NDA then it is probably best if you invest through the PGF DAO or an xx-DAO, as it is not required that a DAO token holder has AML / KYC or has signed an NDA.
All officers of such DAO will however have undergone AML/KYC and signed at least the Base NDA of the system in order to be able to apply the DAO's instructions within the PIPE Exchange.
We have a growing number of clients around Europe, ranging from individual Universities to National Government bodies.
Service Provider Partners are specific companies that offer specific services to the various Protégé Company’s e.g. Accountancy, Legal advice, Recruitment services, Telephony, Training, Warehousing, Office space ...Everything that every Protégé Company is likely to need
PIPE will expect to negotiate discounts from the various Service Provider Partners and to admit into the system those suppliers who are willing to support the early stages of Protégé Companies through a realistic cost structure, taking into account the growth potential of their target market and the opportunity to be put in front of a growing number of growing customers. The discounts / sensible payment arrangements, will vary from provider to provider, but some form of allowance for the early stage of the Protégé Company customer will be expected to be made available.
A funding schedule as agreed initially by the IIC can be supplemented, or replaced with a further agreement. This may be required if there has been a significant change in the planning of the Protégé Company, for example in response to a pandemic, or the cessation of material supplies due to conflict or market forces.
A Guild is a DAO like grouping of Associate Members who have come together to create a centre of excellence within the exchange, usually around a specific technical subject. As such they may also pool their collective token resources within the Exchange and invest in projects or fund activities. A Guild that specialises in a particular subject may be 'sub-contracted' by a project / disclosure to propose a resolution to a particular issue within their sphere of expertise, or to pass an expert judgement upon an issue or solution proposed. They may also be the source of common resources required by the various projects and Protégé Companies, and earn commission from the work passed on to their members.
browse to url https://www.labtoipo.com/join-us and fill in the form, we will then contact you to help you into the system.
In order to see and review disclosures you need to register on the system as a Pipe Associate Network (PAN) member and go through the steps required to authenticate your login (Set up and use a 2FA authenticator such as Google Authenticator or Twillo Authy or any other authenticator of your choice), and then go through the process of AML / KYC recognition and certification. That can take anything from 5 mins upwards depending on volumes and time of the day etc. Once you have then digitally signed the base NDA (with the digital certificate public/private key pair we have issued you), we both know it is you and who you are, so we can start to show you the disclosures made.
All access to the disclosure material is logged (even just seeing the title) and we measure the levels of engagement, saw title, looked at detail , started review, posted review etc as a metric of the disclosure.
The final decision on this is up to you, but we can provide guidance along the way. The review scores that you get from the disclosure and validation process will give an insight into the perceptions and expectations of the reviewing business sector associates and financial / investment associates. How you slice and dice the reviews and weight the scores is up to you but again we would offer some standard guidance. Then you just choose the disclosures that have scored over your threshold.
From the first disclosure review onwards you will see the running score of the various parts of the disclosure. You are encouraged to monitor this and where a section is not scoring well it may be appropriate to reword the content such that the concerns of the reviewer are addressed more directly. They will then be notified of the change and given the opportunity to reassess your declaration.
Where you see a red flag against a question, it means that your average review score has dropped below zero (the normal threshold value) and this will be an obstacle to your disclosure being selected for additional progression. Where you see the candlestick extending below the zero marker you have received feedback that has been negative but not sufficient to drag the average down. This is still worth looking at and rectifying if possible as it will both depress the average score and may be indicative of an issue which has resulted in lower scores throughout the disclosure.
It is possible to sign up as an Independent investor if you qualify as an HNWI. Please JOIN us and then once you have registered and have access to the system contact us to become an Independent Investor.
As such you will have the ability to assist with disclosure validation and to invest directly into projects when their Growth Token(s) (GT) are issued.
This will require normal sign up and AML / KYC for someone in your organisation for them to be allowed to represent you within the platform. You will also be expected to offer favourable terms to Protégé Companies on the platform, given that you will have a much greater insight into their capabilities, potential and finances. PIPE will grant you the status of a Service Provider Partner if the criteria are met.
This position is within the control of the xx-DAO / gDAO itself and would normally be by a ballot of the membership with an action to assign you that role. How you persuade members to vote for you is up to you, and how you get on the ballot will be up to the DAO governance processes.
A good place to start is by signalling that you are willing to invest time in the project at an early stage, such as when you review the disclosure, as it is a requirement of a project moving forward that there is at least one business sector associate who has signalled willingness to help the project on its way. Subsequently a project will register a requirement for a particular skill set and you may be notified that you are a match and have been asked to join the project. Becoming a part of the Core Team depends upon how 'Core' you become to the project.
Your account settings as a PAN member gives you access to the (growing) skills taxonomy, and allows you to signal that you have expertise or interest in a particular area. As the taxonomy itself is always growing as new projects cut a new edge on the system, it may be that you find that you have skills that are required that had not been registered previously, as well as new skills you may acquire over time.
You have the opportunity to register a set of skills against a disclosure when it is created or updated that gives an idea of the skills required to understand the disclosure. This can be used to weight the responses given to the disclosure subsequently.
The skills taxonomy allows you to propose a taxonomy 'node' under an existing 'node'. These are recorded as additions to the system and periodically reviewed for inclusion in the base network. We ask that you do a thorough search of the taxonomy and use some imagination as to what it may have been called instead of what you are proposing, before adding a new 'node' so we can simplify the process of de-duplication should that occur.
Various filter options are available and will be extended, enabling you to remove specific reviews from the summary, or reviews that share a specific characteristic (such as email location of the reviewer). This can be used to see if there is a bias creeping into the reviews, but must be used with care as to not deliberately skew the results through a filtration bias. How you use this is up to you, justifying your selection when arguing your case with your sponsor, is also up to you.
In order to see any of the disclosures, you need to undergo the full AML / KYC process and have a signed Base NDA.
When we know who you are, and can be sure that it is you who is logged in, we can start to show you the disclosures.
Every degree of exposure of the disclosures is logged as a part of the process of evaluating the engagement level that the disclosure is achieving. Just by looking at the title and choosing not to look at the detail, gives us a datapoint about both yourself and the disclosure.
As a fully qualified PAN member with AML/ KYC and Base NDA, you will see the Review Disclosures option on your menus. Select a disclosure that looks of interest and read through it, making judgements as to the value of the disclosure parts as you go through. You may well need to take a break and do some background research yourself, so the review process allows you to save a partially created but un-submitted review.
When you are happy that you have completed your review, save the review appropriately and the Disclosure authors will be able to react to your feedback.
If they alter the Disclosure after your review, you will be notified and can go back and see if the new data makes any difference to your review scores.
Your capital is at risk in the normal way. For the gDAO, 100% of your money is held within the gDAO Treasury until it can be invested after which time it is "spent" and you have the internal Fund Tokens (FT) in your wallet at all times. The token does have a market value, although that market value may be less than the value of the investment initially. There are no guarantees as with any investment, although we have sought to mitigate all downside risk. This is far more risk averse and risk mitigated than a normal Angel or VC fund.
The most conventional view argues that an investor can achieve optimal diversification with only 15 to 20 stocks spread across various industries - Investopedia. The PIPE Platform and Lab to IPO Pathway finds, forms and finances c.100+ projects annually (from Y2-3) thus reducing principle risk significantly. Over 5-years, the PGF will have investments in a minimum of 500 projects and (potentially) 900+
It is well documented and well known that angel investing and to a slightly lesser extent VC investing generates poor returns and that both rely on the mitigation of principle risk to generate their 2.5x and 2.6x ROI respectfully. In fact these kind of investments lose 90% of the time. However, by focusing on the quality and quantity of projects using the unique PIPE QED process, increasing the overall due diligence on projects from < 20 hours to > 90 hours AND by focusing specifically on university and research group derived projects, the PIPE outcomes are significantly improved. All of these facts are publicly available.
To be considered a HNWI or Business Investor a minimum deposit of c.€25,000 equivalent is required in the gDAO. We may also ask that you self-certify as a HNWI.
Most universities and research institutes have legal limitations on investment, often due to charitable status. However, there are benefits for universities joining the PIPE Platform as an investor. As an investor, the university can actively back their own institutions projects along the development roadmap in small tranches, alongside other investors and create long term returns over and above being a simple equity holder. They can also benefit from having a fractional share in every other project on PIPExchange, but most importantly perhaps, they can form their own xx-DAO or Guilds within the PGF. This allows the university to create a focused investment ‘pot’ that can specialise in specific opportunities from their own university, and/or form partnerships regionally with other universities and research groups to drive parochial success. They can also partner with other universities and research groups around Europe to focus on specific themes and collaborations. If the university can overcome their objection to being an investor in their own projects and the wider R&D/IP ecosystem, being an investor member of the PIPE and creating xx-DAO is a fantastic opportunity.
The Minimum equity held in any/all projects is 25%, although this is often much higher.
That depends on when you want to get out of the system and how much you want to make. Potentially a profit can be made as soon as an issue has been made if there is surplus demand within the Exchange. You can then dispose of your issue share and exit with a profit. A more significant profit would be available if you had the patience to wait for it, but we recognise that this may not suit your timescales.
Anyone who is involved in investment within the PIPE Platform and PIPExchange must undergo Anti-Money Laundering (AML) checks. The Know Your Customer (KYC) checks are a part of the registration of a PAN member and give meaning to the NDAs and other agreements and arrangements that they may enter into.
AML = Anti-Money Laundering and KYC = Know Your Customer. These are tools used to ensure those involved intimately with any of our projects are known to us, above board and thoroughly certified to engage with projects and the PIPExchange.
PIPE utilises strong authentication of the individual through AML/KYC and further Certification to ensure we know EXACTLY who someone is on the PIPExchange. The PIPE Company OÜ takes system and personal security extremely seriously and audit all interactions regularly through 3rd party forensic accounting to eliminate bad practices and identify unsavoury behaviour. Any individual or group of individuals manipulating the system in any way will be prosecuted to the full extent of applicable laws.
None. The founding team does not hold gDAO or PGF tokens that have not been bought alongside every other token, and have no special rights to redeem them, obtain them at discounted rate or be given them at some later date. As a result the founding team has no incentive to manipulate the valuation of the tokens.
As a project we aim to supply the first €2m or thereabouts. This is a target figure that should enable the Protégé Company to become well enough established to be able to pursue Series A funding and beyond either through the PIPExchange or via 3rd party investors who ‘live’ on the PIPE Platform.
This is actually one of the harder questions to answer, as no one has a crystal ball that can predict accurately what will arise. What we can say is that projects will be coming out of some of the worlds finest universities with a range of ideas and innovations from AI to Zoology and everything in between. Every wave of projects will be influenced by what has been developed beforehand and by the 3rd iteration of a project that has been developed on the back of a project that was developed on the back of ... well the subject of that project is beyond the forecast horizon of our crystal ball! It is not unreasonable to expect that projects coming through the system in the next 5 to 10 years will be performing feats that may be indistinguishable from magic from our current viewpoint. We are involved in making the magic mundane.
Certain types of project which would be considered to be unethical, harmful, discriminatory or unjust are unlikely to achieve a listing on the Exchange, as they will not get past the IIC.
Every Protégé Company will undergo regular valuation which will give a guide value of the tokens that have been issued. The current justified valuation will be published on the PIPExchange and made freely available. The PIPExchange is where all funded projects are listed and performance monitored.
The Independent Investment Committee (IIC) is made up of a number of experienced investors and commercial professionals with project specific guest chairs for specific technology areas. The purpose of the IIC is to give final approval of the business plan developed by the project in its application to become a Protégé Company within the exchange. By this point most reasonable questions and preparation should have been completed validated and signed off, so this is a chance to do a final holistic appraisal of the project, its business plans and the team involved as to suitability for Protégé Company status.
By being an involved experienced Investor, Commercial Associate, xx-DAO Fund Manager and being voted onto the IIC.
The release trigger for the scheduled funding will have been agreed as a part of the IIC acceptance, and will usually be upon either the acceptance of a Statement of Fact or the attainment of a deliverable stage within the QED processes. Once the triggering condition has been met the Protégé Company will be able to withdraw FT from the system that can subsequently be exited as stablecoin or fiat.
The Funding Schedule for a Protégé Company is the agreement reached by the IIC as to the conditions under which amounts of the agreed funding should be made available to the Protégé Company. The QED process provides a regular pathway of events, each of which can be used as a condition to release some funds. In addition a requirement for a specific Statement Of Fact such as "we have resolved the quality issue relating to xyz" that has been signed off by the Protégé Company and a review panel, can be used as a triggering condition for a release of a level of funds. Timescale triggers can also be used, such as an immediate release upon issue of a specified amount and a further release after x period or on achievement of a KPI (whichever comes first). The Funding schedule can also be supplemented by the IIC if there is a material change in circumstances for the Protégé Company.
The only Investor Position with a cap on the amount that can be invested is an xx-DAO. That cap is related to the degree by which the xx-DAO supports the PGF DAO so is in itself actually unlimited.
One of the purposes of the PGF DAO is to operate as a counterweight to the potentially large other investors in the system. The PGF DAO should be able to maintain a size that is at least 10% of the total size of all xx-DAOs combined.
The PIPE Platform holds a lien (control) over EVERY projects intellectual property (IP). This means that if everything fails, YOU the investor, have ALL the secured IP at YOUR collective disposal (within the PIPE General Fund PGF) to either dispose of, restructure or manage for the benefit of ALL investors. This is a true ‘safety net’ system designed to provide the best guarantees to investors possible.
The primary purpose of the platform is to identify and promote those ideas and proposals that have a solid grounding in R&D with assured IP and a solid implementation team. The number of hours of due diligence examination and subsequent development to address any shortfalls is substantial for every project that reaches the Independent Investment Committee (IIC) review stage. Given the opportunity for seasoned investors to participate in the IIC review process and the scope for investors to suggest refinements to the process such that it meets their own established standards, what is passed by the IIC should be acceptable as passing any of the potential investors own review processes. If not, speak up and get it changed, because if it is not good enough for you it needs doublechecking that it is good enough for everyone else.
As the standard of the materials produced for the IIC should have a consistent baseline, comparison between opportunities should be simplified allowing the investment decision to spend more time getting to know the proposal against checking that everything has been looked at.
Any investment coming up for issue will have completed the full QED process and have satisfied the Independent Investment Committee (IIC) that it is fit to proceed. As you may well have a seat on the IIC or have contributed to the standards, or been involved in the IIC review preparation for the project, the standard is partially up to you. If it falls short of your own internal requirements then speak out and get the standard changed.
As an investor within the system you have access to suggest alterations to the standards applied to the projects going through the QED process.
Where a requirement is identified that is either common to a type of project or common to all projects then the QED process has the flexibility to be able to simply incorporate the additional requirement as standard. If you have a requirement for an addition to the standard, call it out and make it known. If the requirement is not already covered elsewhere, makes sense, and contributes to the quality of the outputs of the system it will be eagerly adopted. We do not believe that the system is perfect. We know it has to be able to evolve, and this has been designed in, so if you spot a deficiency, call it out.
If the first thing you knew about an upcoming issue at the Independent Investment Committee (IIC) stage, you still have 30 days to state your preference for issue, during which time you are encouraged to dig into everything about the project and make up your own mind.
Given that the process that the project has gone through to even get to the IIC and the IIC qualification process itself, where you may well be involved, you should have had sight of the impending issue for a considerably longer time and may even have been involved in formulating the application to the IIC.
If the due diligence standards applied by the process are not up to yours then CALL IT OUT. We have no intention of passing anything through the IIC that does not meet the full requirements of a sensible investment decision. The QED process will have asked the appropriate questions and you should be able to make your decision on the basis of the answers given, if not, let us know.
An issue can only be distributed if it has been agreed by the Independent Investment Committee (IIC) and a funding schedule has been created. The funding scheduled will then be distributed after the 'cooling off' period of 30 days.
The IIC is composed of seasoned investors, possibly even yourself, who should have no bias other than is this a sound investment that meets the criteria.
Inclusion on the IIC will be open to any PAN member who is willing to contribute the time and effort needed to appropriately review the proposals made to the IIC. If you have an issue with the performance of the IIC then CALL IT OUT, get involved yourself and get onto the IIC. Investors can vote with their feet and decide not to back ANY project, even after the IIC has agreed, subject to a PGF vote.
If you tell us what they are, they are compatible with the QED processes, and add value to the outcomes, then we can not only meet them we can beat them.
1: because only those applications to become a Protégé Company that pass through the qualification processes of QED and make it past the IIC get onto the Exchange.
2: because the statistics show that projects with higher amounts of due diligence have significantly higher survival and ROI, and these projects will have had months of ongoing DD.
3: Most significantly because the statistics show that university based R&D/IP has a much higher survival rate than non-university based R&D/IP. This might be extended to say that where the R&D and IP generation process has been to a specific standard, usually associated with that of a university research project, then regardless of origin, the project has a much higher survival and ROI.
The statistics are skewed somewhat by the fact that the survival rate of 'general projects and investments' may include those originating in a university and therefore actually making the comparison between 'University Only' and 'General + some university ones' where the 'some university ones' contribution to the 'General' performance is quite marked.
We would encourage investors to look at their own track records and see what the impact would be of removing projects which had a significant academic R&D / IP contribution from their datasets. Whatever the outcome, average goes up (sounds like the project would not have passed IIC), or average goes down (as we suspected), would be of interest to all.
Because of the standards that the various opportunities are expected to meet as a part of the QED process, comparison should be simpler, but remember we may be trying to compare a Quantum physics, with a molecular biology, with a materials science, with an AI, so a lot of it will rely upon your own expertise and preferences.
At heart we would like to run and fund as many as reach the Independent Investment Committee (IIC) and pass. Realistically that will be restricted by funds available, (so deposit more). Given the volume of untouched projects already in existence, we want to process as many as possible that can be given a thorough review.
Projects that go forward as a licensing agreement follow a different path to those going forward as a Protégé Company that is taking on the production of the product under development. Commercial clients who wish to purchase the license to use the IP developed are issued with an NFT that gives them the rights to do so for a set period. i.e. The license is for a fixed period under specific terms. Part of the terms of the license will be that the licensee assigns any additional IP generated off of the back of the license, back to the project, and gives freedom to the original researchers to use such IP without hinderance.
Such additional IP is then considered to be a part of the IP licensed out subsequently, and the returns from such licensing are split proportionately between the originators (i.e. the original researchers and the subsequent additional research IP created by the initial licensees).
In this manner the value of the IP is enhanced by each subsequent licensee, and the contributing licensees obtain a fair return on their contribution subsequently.
Join our discord by clicking on the "Discord" tab in the top menu for support.
You can find out how to use the test-net on our website here : https://www.thepipegdao.io/blog/beta-test-the-future-of-impact-investing-with-the-pgf-web3-launchpad
No, the equity will be owned by PIPE who will act as the trusted custodian for equity of projects allocated PGF Launchpad members
You can directly hold ownership of tokens relating to projects in the PIPE through either being a recognised investor within the PIPE system (having completed KYC and AML requirements) or indirectly through your holdings within the system itself as a recognised investor or indirectly through your membership within the PGF and / or it's Launchpad which is itself a recognised investor.
As a PAN member and contributor you can also accrue 'sweat equity' in specific projects within which you can hold equity directly when converted at the point of investment.
Your allocation will be automatically sold and your gains will be distributed back you to in the PGF Launch Pad Pool
No, gDAO participation does not require any investment the PGF Launch Pad.
We cannot confirm any airdrops for regulatory compliance reasons.
Benefits include a 20% life time discount (NFT) on deposits on the up and coming Launchpad Beta product and other ecosystem fees, VIP event access and early adopter rewards .
After 6 months 50% of your funds will be eligible for withdrawal and after 12 months your full account balance will be eligible for withdrawal (subject to terms and conditions)
By fulfilling our participation requirements, including, but not limited to, market research survey for product improvement, details TBA.
No PGF membership does not earn passive income since participation requirements must be met to access rewards as stated above.
Join our discord by clicking on the "Join Discord" tab in the top menu of thepipegdao.io website for support.
Avalanche, Arbitrum, Base, BSC(Binance Smart Chain), Polygon, and Optimism (Ethereum to follow shortly)
You do as the user.
You can find out how to use the test-net on our website here : https://www.thepipegdao.io/blog/introducing-the-pgf-university-rwa-ip-launchpad-alpha
Yes gains are distributed as membership rewards in USCD (stable coin) if and when a listed project is acquired on the PEX (PIPE Exchange)
The networks were selected based on them having among the highest TVL (Total Value Locked) and adoption.
Ergo the EVM (Ethereum Virtual Machine) standard is the most widely adopted by both developers and users as it stands.
USDC is generally compliant with regulators, is widely supported on most of the major networks and is highly liquid.
No, it tied to your wallet (soulbound).
Yes. If you are found to be in breach of any of our term & conditions, or other policies, or conducting suspicious or illegal activity, your membership NFT will be 'burned'.
No, within the gDAO, projects are funded as a basket in equal amounts at once when you deposit into the platform.
Different regulations apply if you become a member of the PAN and become a recognised and qualified (AML / KYC) investor on the PEX.
No it does not. Those rights lie with the PIPE company on behalf of members.
You must join our Discord server and verify your membership by following the established process for obtaining your 'PGF Launchpad Member' Role. Open a support ticket in Discord for assistance
No you cannot since you only verify your membership via Discord on one network.
Yes there will be an airdrop of the $gDAO governance token based on participation in the ecosystem and NOT the amount you deposit on the platform.
The deposits are automatically sent to a multi-sig wallet managed by gDAO and PIPE team members and not within a smart contract.
This virtually eliminates the risk of smart contract exploits since deposits are not held within a smart contract.
In order to be admitted to a project it is normal for a new project team member to be asked to sign a version of the Base NDA that specifically includes the project being read into by the project lead.
The project level NDA is required in order that there be NO AMBIGUITY with regards to the responsibilities of the signatories over the confidentiality of the information passed as it is likely to include at some stage elements of the unprotected IP of the project.
At this point the access to the information about a project is restricted to the members of that project and under their control as to what is being recorded or not.
It is perfectly feasible for a project to complete the entire process without recording any unprotected IP on the PIPE system. Where such unprotected IP is recorded PIPE is under the same obligation as any other signatory of a Project NDA to treat the information so covered as confidential.
Due to the nature of the NDAs that PIPE has signed in the process of accepting projects we are restricted in what we can say within a public forum.
If you are a signed in PAN member then you already know the answer to this question and will have access to disclosures, potential project involvements and projects with which you are working.
Within the public domain all we can say is that there a wide variety of projects that come through the system from universities and research establishments across Europe, the UK and Switzerland, which relate to diverse problems and proposals for their solution using fresh R&D IP output.
If you want to know more then you will have to go through the AML / KYC procedures and sign into at least the general NDA governing the confidentiality of the date to which you may be exposed.
As a project you have several routes open to you to find an associate to assist you.
1: By registering the skills required for such an associate, the system can skill match to associates already known to the system and start the search for additional resources externally.
2: By publishing a 'help wanted' within the system to advertise the fact that you are looking in case you need to remind associates to update their own skill definition. This is useful as the skills taxonomy grows by the process of additional disclosures and projects coming onto the system, and associates may have not marked up the skill they posses simply because it was not an option to do so previously and they had not thought to do so. Ironically this is a greater problem where the associate has 'unconscious competence' i.e. it is so natural that they may forget that it is not common.
3: By finding the associate yourself from your own networking and then getting them to become an associate so you can rope them in.
The QED process is built around the delivery of a response to various requests for proof, and answers to questions. These are broken down into named deliverables that can be approved as having met the requirements. These deliverables are the components which build up to a stage completion and a sign off against all of the deliverables delivered so far, which is then recorded on the DLT. It is this systematic process, supported by associates and the PIPE Platform that improves the outcome of projects.
Almost every deliverable within the QED process will ask for one or more proofs or evidence requests, i.e. it is not enough to say that it has been done, how can you prove that it has been done and to what standard? This is instrumental in determining project ‘gaps’ and the associated risk profile of projects.
A Statement of Fact is usually a specific answer required to a specific question that is signed by the officers of the Protégé Company, e.g. “We have now manufactured over 1000 of product A”. Such statements should be reviewable and the acceptance of the statement may well trigger a release of funds from the Funding Schedule.
The average ROI for an Angel investor is 2.5x and for a VC it is 2.6x the initial investment. 90% of all VC projects fail and so the 2.5x and 2.6x ROI are based on only 10% of projects reaching the right maturity over time. In addition, Angel funds and VC funds charge management fees ranging from 4-5% in the first year to 1-2% over subsequent years, which, for an average fund holding period of five years equates to 9% to 13% cost on your money.PGF has minimal costs equal to deposit fees charged by 3rd parties (bank/card transactions) and no more than 1% charge for administration. PIPE focuses on a sector that performs 4x better than Angel/VC investments and through a longer Due Diligence by PIPE and associates (up to >90 hours per project) which increases outcomes by 600%. This reduces the failure rate from 90% to only 5% and increases the ROI from 2.5/2.6x to a minimum of 3.97x. All these figures are publicly available.
European University R&D/IP performs 4x better (400%) over 4-5 years than their peer group (Forbes & Anderson Law), increased due diligence to >20 hours increases project survival rates by 6x or 600% (LinkedIn StartUp group). PIPE due diligence is >90 hours for EVERY project. 90% of all angel/early stage investments fail, but only 5% (forecast) of PIPE projects. When PIPE applies its improved due diligence and targeted sector, plus the application of patient, targeted capital it achieves the returns stated.
As a part of the general security of the system and in order to provide auditability, we require to be able to firstly determine that a specific login is being used legitimately, this is done via the use of Two Factor Authentication (2FA), and then to be able to identify who it is that is using the authenticated login, this is through the Visual ID checks that are a part of the AML/KYC procedures.
First you get a username and password.
Then you establish 2FA authentication.
Then you are issued with a unique digital certificate to the 2FA authenticated login of that username.
Then you supply your Visual ID details, which include your username, signed by your certificate.
At the end of that we know that the login account that was issued the certificate is the person in the Visual ID details supplied (as they signed it by having the private key of the certificate).
That then allows us to trust the login as being the person, at least to the level of certainty of the ID documentation used.
PIPE in the UK is registered under the EIS/SEIS scheme, although there are no guarantees that subsequent tax relief will be agreed by HMRC. Investments are made across the EU and PIPE is an EU Business where various tax incentives exist in different regions. It is sensible to assume there will be no tax relief, although PIPE is investigating how regional tax efficiencies can be utilised to the benefit of DAO investors. Under some circumstances you may benefit more via EIS/SEIS as a HNWI co-investor (UK projects) than as a PGF token holder, the choice is yours.
Tokenisation is a simple method for accounting for the amount by which one person has contributed to the system compared to another. It is a mechanism that has been used for millennia and is the basis of all of our fiat currencies worldwide. Digital Tokens (as in crypto currencies etc) is just the next evolution of this. At the heart of any of these systems is an accounting system that counts who has what. The challenge is always to keep the system honest and immune from manipulation and fraudulent change. Modern cryptographic methods (encryption and digital signatures) provide modern methods of doing this in the same way that notarised signatures and paper contracts have done so in the past. Its just another, and faster way of solving an old problem, and does away with certain roles that held a monopoly on what could be done and so could charge whatever they could.