The four ventures were scoped against a slower curve. At 100M members by 2031 the arithmetic changes in three ways: the revenue scenarios roughly triple, they arrive two years earlier, and the ventures need more capital sooner to meet a demand curve that no longer waits for them. Every number below shows its drivers — move one and the model moves with it.
Not member count. Circulating value — how much economic activity actually flows through Unity. Everything the ventures earn is a small share of that flow, so it is worth stating the assumption plainly and conservatively:
Both drivers are deliberately modest. A 40% active rate is below what mature mutual-credit circuits sustain, and $400 a year is roughly a dollar a day of exchanged value — a few hours of help, some produce, a repair, a shared tool. Sardex members transact far more than that; Sarafu users in Kenya transacted meaningful fractions of household spending. If the real figures land at 50% and $600, circulating value is $30B and every venture line below nearly doubles.
That last number is the ethical test as much as the commercial one. The ventures live on a small toll at the edges of an economy they don’t own — which is what keeps the commons a commons.
Brings organizations into circuits: assessment, integration, staff activation, ongoing circuit management. The Sardex motion, run as a company. At 100M members roughly 400,000 organizations sit inside circuits; not all pay, and the ones that do pay modestly.
What changed: previously $20M in a year-five scenario. Faster member growth means more organizations reachable sooner and a much larger installed base by 2031. ↑ 5×, arriving two years earlier. Capital implication: this is a people business — it must hire ahead of the curve. Round rises from $1.0M to ~$2.5M, and it should raise a Series A in 2029 rather than bootstrapping.
The Framework stays public-domain forever; what sells is the operational capability — running defensible coherence measurement for organizations that need it: cities, funders, ESG programs, health systems, large employers. Red Hat’s model: the standard is free, the capability is paid.
What changed: previously $27M. The driver isn’t member count directly — it is credibility. A validated framework running live across 60,000 communities is the reference implementation that makes enterprise licensing straightforward. ↑ 3.3×. Capital implication: round holds near $2.5–3.0M; this is the highest-margin venture and the one with genuine venture-scale upside.
The rails: cross-community settlement, atomic swaps, business accounts, custody. Deliberately thin margins on a very large flow — a utility, not a rent.
What changed: previously $22M, and critically the timing — volume of this size arrives in 2031 rather than 2033, which changes the infrastructure build schedule and the licensing calendar. ↑ 2×, two years earlier. Capital implication: round rises from $3.5M to ~$4.5M; regulated settlement at this volume needs reserves, licenses, and compliance staff before revenue, not after.
Uses the network’s ground-truth sensing to verify restoration — the credibility problem the climate market has failed to solve. Sells verification, never member data; that line is written into the covenant.
What changed: previously $16M. Verification capacity scales with community density on the ground — 60,000 communities is an observation network no satellite programme can match. ↑ 2.4×. Capital implication: round holds at ~$2.0M; this venture is gated on the soil current and dMRV partnerships, not on capital.
| Venture | Previous Y5 scenario | v3 scenario @ 2031 | Change | Round — was | Round — now |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Threshold | $20M | $102M | 5.1× | $1.0M | $2.5M |
| Coherence Labs | $27M | $89M | 3.3× | $2.5M | $3.0M |
| Unity Exchange | $22M | $46M | 2.1× | $3.5M | $4.5M |
| Regenera | $16M | $38M | 2.4× | $2.0M | $2.0M |
| Combined | $85M | $274M | 3.2× | $9.0M | $12.0M |
Scenarios, not forecasts — illustrative planning cases built from the drivers shown, for discussion rather than reliance, and not an offer of securities.
Founding donors give into the nonprofit Trust and receive priority access to each venture round. The accelerated curve makes that right materially more valuable, and it makes the timing tighter:
Coherence Labs and Threshold move from 2029 to late 2028 — within months of the founding round completing. Donors exercise priority while the proof is fresh and the valuations still reflect a pre-inflection company.
The Trust holds founding equity in all four. At a $274M combined revenue scenario, that stake is what eventually endows the commons — the mechanism by which the nonprofit stops needing donations at all.
$9M → $12M across the four, staged over 2028–2030. Donors with appetite can meet more of it; the priority right covers every round, not only the first.
Every revenue line above sits on the institutional or settlement side. No premium membership tier, ever — the moment a member’s access or measurement depends on payment, coherence becomes purchasable and the entire claim collapses. This belongs in the Trust’s founding documents as a limit on our own future behavior, not as a pricing policy we could revisit.
The counterweight to $274M of venture revenue: the nonprofit that holds the mission stays small, because in a distributed architecture members do not consume central capacity.
| Year | Members | Trust budget | Cost / member | Funded by |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2028 | 65k | $5.24M | $81 | Founding donors — the round |
| 2029 | 2M | ~$7M | $3.50 | Donors ~55% · bioregional & public capital ~45% |
| 2030 | 20M | ~$12M | $0.60 | Venture dividends and licensing majority |
| 2031 | 100M | ~$22M | $0.22 | Self-funding — ~8% of combined venture revenue endows the commons |
A $22M commons serving a hundred million people is roughly a mid-size foundation’s budget. It is only possible because communities run their own nodes and employ their own stewards — and because the ventures, not the members, carry the commercial load.