---
type: claim
domain: internet-finance
description: "Pine Analytics observation from futard.io launches identifies reluctance to be first depositor as distinct friction from liquidity requirements"
confidence: experimental
source: "Pine Analytics (@PineAnalytics), futard.io behavioral observation, 2026-03-05"
created: 2026-03-11
---

# First-mover hesitancy in futarchy raises creates momentum-dependent coordination where deposits follow rather than lead

Pine Analytics observed in futard.io's first 48 hours that "people are reluctant to be the first to put money into these raises"—a behavioral pattern where potential investors wait for others to commit before participating themselves. This creates a coordination problem distinct from simple liquidity requirements: even when capital is available, it remains on the sidelines until someone else moves first.

This first-mover hesitancy transforms futarchy fundraising into a momentum game. Raises that attract early deposits create social proof that draws additional capital, while raises that fail to achieve initial traction remain stuck at zero regardless of project quality. The mechanism becomes path-dependent: early momentum determines outcomes more than fundamental value assessment.

The pattern reveals a gap between futarchy's theoretical information aggregation and practical capital coordination. Markets can efficiently price relative value once liquidity exists, but bootstrapping that initial liquidity requires overcoming psychological barriers that conditional token mechanics don't address.

## Evidence

- Pine Analytics direct observation: "People are reluctant to be the first to put money into these raises" (2026-03-05)
- Context: 34 ICOs launched on futard.io in ~2 days, only 2 reached funding thresholds
- $15.6M total deposits concentrated in successful raises rather than distributed across attempts
- 929 wallets participated, but capital flowed to projects with existing momentum

## Mechanism Analysis

First-mover hesitancy differs from the liquidity requirements identified in existing futarchy friction analysis. Liquidity requirements are about absolute capital availability—whether enough money exists to make markets functional. First-mover hesitancy is about coordination sequencing—who commits first and why others wait.

This creates a chicken-and-egg problem at the individual raise level:
- Investors want social proof before committing ("others believe this is viable")
- Social proof requires someone to commit first
- Rational actors wait for others to take first-mover risk
- Raises stall at zero until someone breaks the equilibrium

The 5.9% success rate (2 of 34 raises) suggests most projects never escape this coordination trap. The mechanism selects for projects that can generate initial momentum through existing community, reputation, or marketing—not necessarily for projects with superior fundamentals.

---

Relevant Notes:
- [[futarchy-adoption-faces-friction-from-token-price-psychology-proposal-complexity-and-liquidity-requirements.md]]
- [[permissionless-futarchy-launches-achieve-5-9-percent-funding-success-rate-creating-market-based-quality-filter.md]]
- [[decision-markets-make-majority-theft-unprofitable-through-conditional-token-arbitrage.md]]

Topics:
- [[domains/internet-finance/_map]]
- [[core/mechanisms/_map]]
