Content pfp
Content
@
0 reply
20 recasts
20 reactions

phil pfp
phil
@phil
Some chatter on this, especially around the “eat their lunch” phrasing My perspective as a user: Warpcast has a difficult role to play: as the largest product on the Farcaster protocol, their actions will drive the majority of new user growth Along the way, there will be other apps that emerge to fill gaps in the Warpcast value prop. Scheduled casts, onchain actions, real time chat, etc As those features are validated by users, the Warpcast team is then faced with a choice: integrate these features into the main app (thereby stimulating growth), or intentionally avoid building it to reduce competition with ecosystem partners The rub: if Farcaster doesn’t significantly grow, then all ecosystem apps will likely die anyway due to lack of sufficient users. My personal framework around this topic is less vibes driven and more realpolitik; as an app builder, you have to be prepared for your great feature idea to be copied as soon as it’s proven to be successful with users.
7 replies
25 recasts
207 reactions

ChrisCoCreated pfp
ChrisCoCreated
@chriscocreated
I wonder if there is a model where sherlocked apps get the idea ‘bought’ by Warpcast. Essentially Retro funding for effort - they have the treasury to do it. Fundamentally all alt apps need to have a different value prop that filling than holes in Warpcast that any reasonable user would expect. In the meantime as you say it’s holding back adoption.
2 replies
0 recast
17 reactions

jd đŸŒș pfp
jd đŸŒș
@jdlewin.eth
that makes a fair amount of sense. might be difficult wrt timelines how long does it take for a new tool to achieve the pmf and scale necessary for their value prop to be annexed? longer it takes the greater the grant size
0 reply
0 recast
2 reactions