Withdraw ₳889,500 for Cardano Ecosystem Pavilions at Exhibitions
210 DReps voted · 65 with a rationale
Open a row to read the rationale.
- Yes 328.9K ₳ No rationale
- Yes 314.4K ₳ Rationale
In alignment with my voting during the 2025 Cardano Budget Reconciliation process on the Ekklesia platform, I support this withdrawal and therefore vote YES.
In alignment with my voting during the 2025 Cardano Budget Reconciliation process on the Ekklesia platform, I support this withdrawal and therefore vote YES.
- Yes 313.1K ₳ Rationale
I’m voting YES on this proposal as it aligns with my principles of supporting sustainable development, ecosystem visibility, and inclusive growth within Cardano.
The creation of shared Cardano Ecosystem Pavilions at global exhibitions lowers the barrier for participation by smaller projects, enabling broader representation and helping to showcase the diversity and innovation within the ecosystem. By reducing costs and increasing exposure, this initiative supports developer onboarding, public education, and greater global reach.
The proposal includes clear intent and purpose, and with treasury oversight administered by Intersect, I’m confident the funds can be managed responsibly to deliver ecosystem-wide value.
- No 298.6K ₳ Rationale
I just don't see the value here. I do believe in advertising but I don't think this approach has significant potential.
- No 271.5K ₳ No rationale
- No 262.3K ₳ No rationale
- Yes 257K ₳ Rationale
I am voting YES on this proposal to fund Cardano Ecosystem Pavilions at Exhibitions with ₳889,500.
This initiative addresses a critical need to make Cardano projects more visible and accessible at influential exhibitions globally. By subsidizing (not fully covering) project participation, the proposal enables diverse Cardano teams to showcase their work, attract investors and developers, and educate new audiences about the ecosystem’s depth and innovation. Importantly, the approach includes education and follow-up support to maximize each project's event return, and employs a milestone model to ensure accountability and efficiency with treasury funds.
Vendor experience, transparent milestone-based process, and scaled-back budget further enhance cost-effectiveness and trust. This is a practical, high-ROI initiative that strengthens Cardano's global presence and supports sustainable ecosystem growth.
For these reasons, I support this funding request.
- Yes 252.6K ₳ No rationale
- No 245K ₳ No rationale
- No 238.6K ₳ No rationale
- Yes 234.1K ₳ No rationale
- No 208.6K ₳ Rationale
While increasing Cardano's visibility is important, this proposal risks duplicating existing treasury-funded efforts, such as the Cardano Summit 2025 (part of the broader 275M ADA ecosystem budget for events and marketing), regional tech events, and the Growth & Marketing Committee's allocations for similar outreach. It also overlaps with community hub initiatives and partnerships like Rare Evo's collaborations on side events and media for the Summit. These redundancies could lead to inefficient fund allocation—let's prioritize unique, high-impact projects over fragmented marketing spends.
- Yes 206.4K ₳ No rationale
- Yes 203.6K ₳ No rationale
- Yes 195.9K ₳ No rationale
- Abstain 190.2K ₳ No rationale
- Yes 184.4K ₳ Rationale
I am voting yes on all 39 Intersect Governance actions. The community has thoroughly reviewed the many proposals presented in the Intersect Budget Process for the 2025 budget. I was deeply involved in the entire process as an SME for the Budget Committee, and then as the Secretary for the Budget Committee.
The proposals presented represent an incredible amount of development for our ecosystem for the next year. The teams all received at least 50% on Ekklesia polling. The teams will face milestones in order to continue to receive funding. If a team fails to deliver, the process will stop them from enriching themselves without returning value.
If anything, we are spending too little on our community. We need to spend more to further develop our governance and our organized events. This is a liquid democracy. If you believe that all of these proposals deserve a chance to deliver, you can shift your delegation to my DRep ID.
- Abstain 180.9K ₳ No rationale
- No 177.6K ₳ No rationale
- No 166.4K ₳ Rationale
Hard to truly gauge and attribute ROI from a marketing effort like this.
✅ Pros
Enhanced Ecosystem Visibility and Professionalism: A large, unified Cardano pavilion presents a powerful and professional image to the wider tech and crypto world. It directly combats the "ghost chain" narrative by showcasing a vibrant ecosystem of active projects, helping to attract developers, investors, and new users who may only know the "Cardano" name. 🎪Democratizes Access for Builders: The primary barrier for many startups and community projects attending major events is the prohibitive cost. By subsidizing a portion of the expense, this initiative enables smaller, innovative teams to gain exposure they could never afford on their own, ensuring that the ecosystem's talent is well-represented.
Creates Synergy and Collaboration: Housing multiple Cardano projects in one shared space fosters a strong sense of community and encourages collaboration. Projects can cross-promote, learn from each other, and present a more compelling, interconnected story to potential partners and users.
Includes Education and Support: The proposal isn't just about funding a booth; it includes providing support to projects to maximize their return on investment (ROI). Training on pre-event preparation, on-site engagement, and post-event follow-up increases the likelihood of tangible, positive outcomes.
Experienced Vendor and Secure Fund Management: The vendor has extensive experience in organizing exhibition appearances, and the proposal utilizes Intersect's standard, highly secure fund management framework. This includes audited smart contracts and oversight from a committee of trusted entities, ensuring a high degree of accountability and transparency.
🤔 Cons
Highly Speculative Return on Investment (ROI): Marketing and brand awareness campaigns are notoriously difficult to quantify. While the vendor aims to collect KPIs, it will be very challenging to directly attribute a specific increase in users, developers, or Total Value Locked (TVL) to attendance at a conference. This makes it a high-cost initiative with an uncertain and hard-to-measure payoff.High Upfront Payment Risk: The proposal states that the majority of funds are needed well in advance to secure the best pricing and locations for the pavilions. This means the treasury is paying a large sum of money before the primary service is rendered (i.e., before the events take place), which presents a significant financial risk if an event is canceled or the vendor under-delivers.
Centralization of Opportunity: The vendor and Intersect will be the gatekeepers deciding which projects are selected for a subsidized spot and which global exhibitions to target. This creates a centralized decision-making process that could be perceived as biased or unfair by projects that are not chosen.
Questionable Efficiency of In-Person Events: In an increasingly digital world, some may argue that ₳889,500 is an inefficient use of capital. These funds could potentially have a greater, more measurable impact if spent on online marketing, global virtual hackathons, improved developer documentation, or direct grants to builders.
Potential for Poor Representation: The success of a pavilion depends entirely on the quality and preparedness of the projects within it. If participating projects are not compelling, are unable to articulate their value, or are unprofessional, the pavilion could end up doing more harm than good to Cardano's brand reputation.
- Yes 143.9K ₳ No rationale
- Yes 137.3K ₳ No rationale
- Abstain 131.7K ₳ No rationale
- Yes 131.6K ₳ No rationale
- Yes 111.7K ₳ No rationale
- Yes 105.7K ₳ No rationale
- Yes 103K ₳ No rationale
- Yes 94.7K ₳ No rationale
- Yes 89.8K ₳ No rationale
- Yes 89.6K ₳ No rationale
- No 88.7K ₳ No rationale
- Yes 61.9K ₳ No rationale
- Yes 61.8K ₳ No rationale
- Yes 60.1K ₳ No rationale
- No 59.6K ₳ No rationale
- No 58.6K ₳ No rationale
- No 55.9K ₳ No rationale
- Abstain 53K ₳ No rationale
- Abstain 49.7K ₳ No rationale
- No 49.4K ₳ No rationale
- No 49.3K ₳ No rationale
- No 48.5K ₳ No rationale
- Abstain 48.4K ₳ No rationale
- No 45.2K ₳ No rationale
- Yes 36.2K ₳ No rationale
- No 26.3K ₳ No rationale
- Yes 15.1K ₳ No rationale
- No 14.3K ₳ No rationale
- Yes 8.3K ₳ No rationale
- Yes 6.8K ₳ No rationale