rio: extract from 2026-03-05-futardio-launch-blockrock.md

- Source: inbox/archive/2026-03-05-futardio-launch-blockrock.md
- Domain: internet-finance
- Extracted by: headless extraction cron (worker 6)

Pentagon-Agent: Rio <HEADLESS>

domains/internet-finance/MetaDAO is the futarchy launchpad on Solana where projects raise capital through unruggable ICOs governed by conditional markets creating the first platform for ownership coins at scale.md

@@ -82,6 +82,12 @@ Futardio cult launch (2026-03-03 to 2026-03-04) demonstrates MetaDAO's platform
 
 (challenge) Areal's failed Futardio launch ($11,654 raised of $50K target, REFUNDING status) demonstrates that futarchy-governed fundraising does not guarantee capital formation success. The mechanism provides credible exit guarantees through market-governed liquidation and governance quality through conditional markets, but market participants still evaluate project fundamentals and team credibility. Futarchy reduces rug risk but does not eliminate market skepticism of unproven business models or early-stage teams.
 
+
+### Additional Evidence (extend)
+*Source: [[2026-03-05-futardio-launch-blockrock]] | Added: 2026-03-12 | Extractor: anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.5*
+
+(confirm + extend) BlockRock's charter explicitly describes MetaDAO's permissionless launchpad as providing 'full-stack futarchy governance with legal enforcement, so that token value is tied to treasury value.' The infrastructure is described as 'battle-tested and now publicly available' as of 2025. MtnCapital's 2025 wind-down on MetaDAO demonstrated the liquidation mechanism works as intended: holders received proportional treasury shares through the protocol's built-in enforcement, proving that 'even in failure, no value is lost to extraction or mismanagement.' BlockRock's launch structure (95% ICO distribution, 5% team tokens with performance unlocks) replicates MetaDAO's standard template.
+
 ---
 
 Relevant Notes:

domains/internet-finance/asset-management-fee-model-incentivizes-scale-over-performance-because-management-fees-dominate-revenue-regardless-of-returns.md

@@ -0,0 +1,44 @@
+---
+type: claim
+domain: internet-finance
+description: "BlackRock's 73% management fee revenue vs 5% performance fee revenue creates structural incentive to prioritize asset accumulation over alpha generation"
+confidence: likely
+source: "BlockRock Charter citing BlackRock revenue structure, 2026-03-05"
+created: 2026-03-11
+---
+
+# Asset management fee model incentivizes scale over performance because management fees dominate revenue regardless of returns
+
+BlackRock earns approximately 73% of its revenue from management fees, which are collected regardless of fund performance. Performance fees account for just 5% of revenue. This creates a structural incentive to prioritize asset accumulation over alpha generation.
+
+The fee structure drives three downstream pathologies:
+
+1. **Consensus-driven investing** — Career risk aversion leads to benchmark-hugging strategies that minimize tracking error rather than maximize returns. Deviating from consensus creates personal career risk even if it would generate alpha.
+
+2. **Narrative capture** — Asset managers chase institutional clout through positioning (e.g., BlackRock's shifting ESG stance) rather than investment performance. ESG adoption correlates with institutional demand for the positioning, not with fund performance.
+
+3. **Organizational bloat** — Scale demands complexity (BlackRock has 20,000+ employees, 70+ global offices, 1,700+ ETFs), which reinforces the pressure to gather assets to cover fixed costs. The organization becomes optimized for asset gathering, not decision-making.
+
+The result: most actively managed funds underperform their benchmarks, especially after fees. The fee model creates a negative feedback loop where scale → complexity → compliance → worse decisions → continued fee extraction despite underperformance.
+
+## Evidence
+
+- BlackRock revenue: ~73% from management fees, ~5% from performance fees (BlockRock Charter, 2026, citing BlackRock public financials)
+- BlackRock scale: 20,000+ employees, 70+ global offices, 1,700+ ETFs (BlockRock Charter, 2026)
+- Industry pattern: most actively managed funds underperform benchmarks after fees (widely documented, cited in BlockRock Charter)
+- ESG positioning shifts correlate with institutional demand, not performance optimization (BlockRock Charter example)
+
+## Challenges
+
+The BlackRock revenue percentages are cited from BlockRock's charter, which does not provide a source link to BlackRock's investor relations materials. These should be independently verified against BlackRock's 10-K or earnings calls. The claim that ESG shifts are narrative capture rather than genuine conviction is inferential—it's plausible but not definitively proven by the charter. The underperformance claim is industry-standard but not quantified in this source.
+
+---
+
+Relevant Notes:
+- [[token economics replacing management fees and carried interest creates natural meritocracy in investment governance]]
+- [[LLMs shift investment management from economies of scale to economies of edge because AI collapses the analyst labor cost that forced funds to accumulate AUM rather than generate alpha]]
+- [[giving away the intelligence layer to capture value on capital flow is the business model because domain expertise is the distribution mechanism not the revenue source]]
+
+Topics:
+- [[domains/internet-finance/_map]]
+- [[foundations/teleological-economics/_map]]

domains/internet-finance/blockrock-demonstrates-futarchy-governed-liquid-asset-allocation-as-viable-alternative-to-illiquid-vc-bets.md

@@ -0,0 +1,41 @@
+---
+type: claim
+domain: internet-finance
+description: "Futarchy governance requires liquid, priceable assets because decision markets fail on illiquid VC deals with asymmetric information and binary outcomes"
+confidence: experimental
+source: "BlockRock Charter, futard.io, 2026-03-05"
+created: 2026-03-11
+---
+
+# Futarchy governance requires liquid, priceable assets because decision markets fail on illiquid VC deals with asymmetric information and binary outcomes
+
+Futarchy governance works by letting markets price competing outcomes. However, MtnCapital's 2025 launch as an early-stage VC fund demonstrated a critical failure mode: the mechanism struggled to pass proposals and eventually wound down.
+
+The root cause was structural: private VC deals are difficult to price with asymmetric information, long timelines, and binary outcomes. Decision markets require continuous price discovery to function. When the underlying asset (a portfolio company stake) cannot be independently valued or traded, the market has no signal to aggregate.
+
+BlockRock's mandate for liquid asset allocation—spot markets, perpetual futures, lending markets, structured yield products, and RWAs on Solana—gives futarchy the pricing efficiency it requires. Decision markets can evaluate portfolio construction, yield strategies, and value accrual better than illiquid VC bets because these positions have real-time market prices that traders can reference.
+
+Critically, when MtnCapital wound down, holders received their proportional share of the treasury through the protocol's built-in liquidation mechanism. The system's guarantees worked as intended: even in failure, no value was lost to extraction or mismanagement. This proves the infrastructure is sound; the failure was in the asset class selection, not the governance mechanism.
+
+## Evidence
+
+- MtnCapital launched as early-stage VC fund on MetaDAO in 2025, struggled with proposal passage, wound down
+- MtnCapital liquidation returned proportional treasury shares to holders via protocol mechanism (BlockRock Charter, 2026)
+- BlockRock explicitly targets liquid asset allocation for risk-adjusted returns optimization
+- Solana ecosystem now includes spot markets, perpetual futures, lending markets, structured yield products, and tokenized RWAs with composable infrastructure
+- BlockRock charter states: "Decision markets can evaluate portfolio construction, yield strategies, and value accrual better than illiquid VC bets"
+
+## Challenges
+
+This claim rests on a single case study (MtnCapital) and BlockRock's stated positioning. No trading data yet exists for BlockRock's decision markets to confirm that liquid assets actually produce better proposal passage rates or decision quality. The liquid vs illiquid distinction may be confounded by other factors (team quality, market conditions, proposal design, governance parameter tuning). The claim assumes decision market pricing efficiency scales to asset allocation but this remains untested at BlockRock's intended scale.
+
+---
+
+Relevant Notes:
+- [[MetaDAOs futarchy implementation shows limited trading volume in uncontested decisions]]
+- [[futarchy-excels-at-relative-selection-but-fails-at-absolute-prediction-because-ordinal-ranking-works-while-cardinal-estimation-requires-calibration]]
+- [[optimal governance requires mixing mechanisms because different decisions have different manipulation risk profiles]]
+
+Topics:
+- [[domains/internet-finance/_map]]
+- [[core/mechanisms/_map]]

domains/internet-finance/futarchy-governed liquidation is the enforcement mechanism that makes unruggable ICOs credible because investors can force full treasury return when teams materially misrepresent.md

@@ -52,6 +52,12 @@ Critically, the proposal nullifies a prior 90-day restriction on buybacks/liquid
 
 MycoRealms implements unruggable ICO structure with automatic refund mechanism: if $125,000 target not reached within 72 hours, full refunds execute automatically. Post-raise, team has zero direct treasury access — operates on $10,000 monthly allowance with all other expenditures requiring futarchy approval. This creates credible commitment: team cannot rug because they cannot access treasury directly, and investors can force liquidation through futarchy proposals if team materially misrepresents (e.g., fails to publish operational data to Arweave as promised, diverts funds from stated use). Transparency requirement (all invoices, expenses, harvest records, photos published to Arweave) creates verifiable baseline for detecting misrepresentation.
 
+
+### Additional Evidence (confirm)
+*Source: [[2026-03-05-futardio-launch-blockrock]] | Added: 2026-03-12 | Extractor: anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.5*
+
+(confirm) MtnCapital case study: When the futarchy-governed VC fund wound down in 2025, 'holders received their proportional share of the treasury through the protocol's built-in liquidation mechanism. The system's guarantees worked as intended.' BlockRock's charter cites this as proof of safety: 'Even in failure, no value is lost to extraction or mismanagement.' This validates that liquidation enforcement works not just in theory but in practice when a futarchy-governed fund fails to achieve its mandate.
+
 ---
 
 Relevant Notes:

domains/internet-finance/onchain-asset-universe-on-solana-rivals-traditional-asset-manager-access-without-friction.md

@@ -0,0 +1,52 @@
+---
+type: claim
+domain: internet-finance
+description: "Solana's onchain asset breadth (spot, futures, lending, yield, RWAs) now rivals traditional asset manager access without geographic or accreditation friction"
+confidence: experimental
+source: "BlockRock Charter, futard.io, 2026-03-05"
+created: 2026-03-11
+---
+
+# Onchain asset universe on Solana rivals traditional asset manager access without friction
+
+The universe of investable assets on Solana has expanded to include:
+
+- Spot markets with deep liquidity
+- Perpetual futures
+- Lending markets
+- Structured yield products
+- RWAs (tokenized stocks, bonds, commodities)
+
+These assets are accessible onchain with composable infrastructure, meaning they can be programmatically traded, collateralized, and rebalanced without the geographic restrictions, accreditation barriers, and settlement delays of traditional finance.
+
+BlockRock's positioning assumes this asset breadth is sufficient to support a futarchy-governed asset allocation strategy targeting risk-adjusted returns. The charter states: "The breadth of onchain assets available now rivals what traditional asset managers can access, without the friction."
+
+The claim conflates two separate propositions: (1) that these asset classes exist onchain, and (2) that they rival traditional finance in depth and accessibility. The first is demonstrable; the second remains speculative.
+
+## Evidence
+
+- Solana DeFi ecosystem includes liquid spot markets, perpetual futures, lending protocols (2025-2026)
+- RWA tokenization platforms operating on Solana with stocks, bonds, commodities (BlockRock Charter, 2026)
+- BlockRock's mandate explicitly targets liquid asset allocation across these categories
+- Traditional asset managers face geographic restrictions, accreditation requirements, multi-day settlement (industry standard)
+
+## Challenges
+
+This claim conflates *availability* with *depth*. While these asset classes exist onchain, critical gaps remain:
+
+- **Liquidity depth**: Tokenized equities may have thin order books compared to NYSE. Bid-ask spreads on RWAs likely exceed traditional markets.
+- **Counterparty risk**: Onchain lending markets carry smart contract and protocol risk that traditional custodians don't. No regulatory backstop.
+- **RWA legal enforceability**: Tokenized stocks and bonds remain untested at scale. Bankruptcy treatment, voting rights, and dividend distribution are unclear.
+- **Settlement finality**: While faster than traditional T+2, Solana's 400ms block time introduces different failure modes than traditional clearing.
+
+BlockRock's success will depend on whether these gaps are material enough to prevent competitive performance vs traditional asset managers. This is untested.
+
+---
+
+Relevant Notes:
+- [[internet finance generates 50 to 100 basis points of additional annual GDP growth by unlocking capital allocation to previously inaccessible assets and eliminating intermediation friction]]
+- [[areal-demonstrates-rwa-tokenization-with-vehicle-pilot-achieving-26-percent-apy-through-carsharing-revenue]]
+- [[AI autonomously managing investment capital is regulatory terra incognita because the SEC framework assumes human controlled registered entities deploy AI as tools]]
+
+Topics:
+- [[domains/internet-finance/_map]]

domains/internet-finance/ownership coin treasuries should be actively managed through buybacks and token sales as continuous capital calibration not treated as static war chests.md

@@ -34,6 +34,12 @@ The deeper connection: since [[Living Capital vehicles are agentically managed S
 - "Continuous calibration" may be indistinguishable from insider trading without robust disclosure mechanisms
 - Since [[futarchy-governed entities are structurally not securities because prediction market participation replaces the concentrated promoter effort that the Howey test requires]], active treasury management by a team could re-introduce the "efforts of others" prong that the structural argument depends on eliminating
 
+
+### Additional Evidence (extend)
+*Source: [[2026-03-05-futardio-launch-blockrock]] | Added: 2026-03-12 | Extractor: anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.5*
+
+(extend) BlockRock's charter explicitly operationalizes this principle: 'Any token holder can submit a proposal to distribute value to holders via buybacks, dividends, or liquidation. If a decision market resolves in favor of a distribution, the treasury is automatically distributed according to the proposal.' This frames treasury management as a continuous governance decision rather than a static reserve. The futarchy mechanism enables real-time capital calibration—token holders can propose distributions when they believe the treasury is overallocated, or retention when they believe capital should remain deployed.
+
 ---
 
 Relevant Notes:

domains/internet-finance/token economics replacing management fees and carried interest creates natural meritocracy in investment governance.md

@@ -15,6 +15,12 @@ Living Capital replaces this with token economics that directly reward decision-
 
 The mechanism aligns with several core LivingIP principles. Since [[ownership alignment turns network effects from extractive to generative]], the token structure ensures that value flows to those who generate it rather than to intermediaries who merely facilitate access. Since [[blind meritocratic voting forces independent thinking by hiding interim results while showing engagement]], combining token-locked voting with blind mechanisms could further strengthen decision quality. Since [[gamified contribution with ownership stakes aligns individual sharing with collective intelligence growth]], the token emissions function as the ownership stakes that incentivize high-quality participation. The result is an investment governance model where authority is earned through demonstrated judgment rather than granted through capital contribution alone.
 
+
+### Additional Evidence (extend)
+*Source: [[2026-03-05-futardio-launch-blockrock]] | Added: 2026-03-12 | Extractor: anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.5*
+
+(extend) BlockRock's fee structure provides a concrete implementation: 95% of tokens distributed to ICO participants at same price, 5% to founding team with performance-based unlocks at 2X, 4X, 8X, 16X, and 32X TWAPs. Monthly allowance of $5K for infrastructure support. BlockRock's charter states: 'Minimal management fees are funded transparently from the treasury and adjustable via governance. No percentage-based skimming.' This contrasts sharply with BlackRock's 73% revenue from management fees vs 5% from performance fees. BlockRock's structure aligns team incentives with token price (which is treasury-backed), eliminating the scale-over-performance incentive that traditional asset managers face.
+
 ---
 
 Relevant Notes:

entities/internet-finance/blockrock-futardio-launch.md

@@ -0,0 +1,53 @@
+---
+type: entity
+entity_type: decision_market
+name: "BlockRock: Futardio ICO Launch"
+domain: internet-finance
+status: failed
+parent_entity: "[[blockrock]]"
+platform: "futardio"
+proposal_url: "https://www.futard.io/launch/J7CmLqfMLVq67swRQa6xCWn7VcyfpyhFSiQdJYNwkP8k"
+proposal_date: 2026-03-05
+resolution_date: 2026-03-06
+category: "fundraise"
+summary: "Ownership fund ICO targeting $500K for futarchy-governed liquid asset allocation on Solana"
+tracked_by: rio
+created: 2026-03-11
+key_metrics:
+  raise_target: "$500,000"
+  total_committed: "$100"
+  outcome: "refunding"
+---
+
+# BlockRock: Futardio ICO Launch
+
+## Summary
+
+BlockRock launched as an "ownership fund" on MetaDAO's Futardio platform targeting $500K to operate a futarchy-governed treasury investing in liquid Solana assets. The fund positioned itself as "BlackRock on the blockchain" with AI-generated proposals, decision market governance, and performance-based team compensation. The ICO failed to reach its funding threshold, closing with only $100 committed.
+
+## Market Data
+
+- **Outcome:** Failed (refunding)
+- **Raise Target:** $500,000
+- **Total Committed:** $100
+- **Launch Date:** 2026-03-05
+- **Close Date:** 2026-03-06
+
+## Significance
+
+BlockRock's charter provides the most detailed public articulation of the "futarchy-governed asset manager" thesis to date. The document explicitly contrasts traditional asset management pathologies (fee misalignment, regulatory drag, organizational bloat) with futarchy's structural advantages (ownership alignment, market-driven decisions, AI scalability).
+
+The launch's failure to attract capital despite sophisticated positioning suggests either:
+1. Market skepticism of futarchy for asset allocation
+2. Insufficient trust in the team/platform
+3. Poor timing (market conditions, competing opportunities)
+4. Inadequate distribution/marketing
+
+The charter cites MtnCapital's 2025 wind-down as proof that liquidation mechanisms work, but this may have signaled risk rather than safety to potential investors.
+
+## Relationship to KB
+
+- [[blockrock]] — parent entity
+- [[MetaDAO is the futarchy launchpad on Solana where projects raise capital through unruggable ICOs governed by conditional markets creating the first platform for ownership coins at scale]] — infrastructure used
+- [[blockrock-demonstrates-futarchy-governed-liquid-asset-allocation-as-viable-alternative-to-illiquid-vc-bets]] — core thesis
+- [[asset-management-fee-model-incentivizes-scale-over-performance-because-management-fees-dominate-revenue-regardless-of-returns]] — problem being solved

entities/internet-finance/blockrock.md

@@ -0,0 +1,39 @@
+---
+type: entity
+entity_type: company
+name: BlockRock
+domain: internet-finance
+status: active
+website: https://blockrock.fund
+twitter: https://x.com/blockrockfund
+tracked_by: rio
+created: 2026-03-11
+key_metrics:
+  raise_target: "$500,000"
+  total_committed: "$100"
+  launch_date: "2026-03-05"
+  status: "refunding"
+  token_symbol: "D9o"
+  token_allocation:
+    ico_participants: "95%"
+    founding_team: "5% (performance-unlocked at 2X, 4X, 8X, 16X, 32X TWAPs)"
+  team_allowance: "$5,000/month"
+---
+
+# BlockRock
+
+**Ownership fund on Solana using futarchy governance and AI agents for liquid asset allocation.** Launched via MetaDAO's permissionless launchpad on 2026-03-05. Positioning as "BlackRock on the blockchain" with treasury-backed tokens, decision markets for portfolio decisions, and AI-generated proposals. Flagship fund targets moderate risk strategy optimizing Sortino ratio across onchain assets (spot, perpetuals, lending, structured yield, RWAs).
+
+## Timeline
+
+- **2026-03-05** — [[blockrock-futardio-launch|Futardio ICO launch]]: $500K target, $100 committed, status refunding
+- **2026-03-06** — ICO closed without reaching funding threshold
+
+## Relationship to KB
+
+BlockRock's charter provides detailed case study of:
+- [[asset-management-fee-model-incentivizes-scale-over-performance-because-management-fees-dominate-revenue-regardless-of-returns]] — contrasts BlackRock's 73% management fee revenue with BlockRock's performance-based model
+- [[blockrock-demonstrates-futarchy-governed-liquid-asset-allocation-as-viable-alternative-to-illiquid-vc-bets]] — positions liquid assets as better fit for futarchy than MtnCapital's VC approach
+- [[onchain-asset-universe-on-solana-rivals-traditional-asset-manager-access-without-friction]] — claims Solana DeFi infrastructure now sufficient for asset manager operations
+- [[MetaDAO is the futarchy launchpad on Solana where projects raise capital through unruggable ICOs governed by conditional markets creating the first platform for ownership coins at scale]] — uses MetaDAO infrastructure for launch
+- [[token economics replacing management fees and carried interest creates natural meritocracy in investment governance]] — implements performance-unlocked team tokens with TWAP triggers

entities/internet-finance/futardio.md

@@ -46,6 +46,7 @@ MetaDAO's token launch platform. Implements "unruggable ICOs" — permissionless
 
 - **2026-03-07** — Areal DAO launch: $50K target, raised $11,654 (23.3%), REFUNDING status by 2026-03-08 — first documented failed futarchy-governed fundraise on platform
 - **2026-03-04** — [[seekervault]] fundraise launched targeting $75,000, closed next day with only $1,186 (1.6% of target) in refunding status
+- **2026-03-05** — [[blockrock-futardio-launch]] launched: $500K target, $100 committed, closed refunding 2026-03-06
 ## Competitive Position
 - **Unique mechanism**: Only launch platform with futarchy-governed accountability and treasury return guarantees
 - **vs pump.fun**: pump.fun is memecoin launch (zero accountability, pure speculation). Futardio is ownership coin launch (futarchy governance, treasury enforcement). Different categories despite both being "launch platforms."

entities/internet-finance/metadao.md

@@ -54,6 +54,7 @@ The futarchy governance protocol on Solana. Implements decision markets through
 - **2026-03** — Pine Analytics Q4 2025 quarterly report published
 
 - **2024-02-18** — [[metadao-otc-trade-pantera-capital]] failed: Pantera Capital's $50,000 OTC purchase proposal rejected by futarchy markets
+- **2026-03-05** — [[blockrock-futardio-launch]] launched on Futardio platform: ownership fund targeting liquid asset allocation, failed to reach $500K threshold
 ## Key Decisions
 | Date | Proposal | Proposer | Category | Outcome |
 |------|----------|----------|----------|---------|

entities/internet-finance/mtncapital.md

@@ -0,0 +1,25 @@
+---
+type: entity
+entity_type: company
+name: MtnCapital
+domain: internet-finance
+status: liquidated
+tracked_by: rio
+created: 2026-03-11
+---
+
+# MtnCapital
+
+**Early-stage VC fund launched on MetaDAO in 2025 as futarchy-governed investment vehicle.** Positioned as ownership coin for private deal flow. Struggled to pass proposals due to difficulty pricing illiquid VC bets with asymmetric information, long timelines, and binary outcomes. Wound down in 2025 with holders receiving proportional treasury shares through protocol's built-in liquidation mechanism, demonstrating that MetaDAO's investor protections work even in failure.
+
+## Timeline
+
+- **2025** — Launched as futarchy-governed early-stage VC fund on MetaDAO
+- **2025** — Struggled to pass proposals due to illiquid asset pricing challenges
+- **2025** — Wound down via protocol liquidation mechanism, holders received proportional treasury shares
+
+## Relationship to KB
+
+- [[MetaDAO is the futarchy launchpad on Solana where projects raise capital through unruggable ICOs governed by conditional markets creating the first platform for ownership coins at scale]] — infrastructure used
+- [[futarchy-governed liquidation is the enforcement mechanism that makes unruggable ICOs credible because investors can force full treasury return when teams materially misrepresent]] — demonstrated in wind-down
+- [[blockrock-demonstrates-futarchy-governed-liquid-asset-allocation-as-viable-alternative-to-illiquid-vc-bets]] — MtnCapital's failure motivates BlockRock's liquid asset focus

inbox/archive/2026-03-05-futardio-launch-blockrock.md

@@ -6,9 +6,15 @@ url: "https://www.futard.io/launch/J7CmLqfMLVq67swRQa6xCWn7VcyfpyhFSiQdJYNwkP8k"
 date: 2026-03-05
 domain: internet-finance
 format: data
-status: unprocessed
+status: processed
 tags: [futardio, metadao, futarchy, solana]
 event_type: launch
+processed_by: rio
+processed_date: 2026-03-11
+claims_extracted: ["blockrock-demonstrates-futarchy-governed-liquid-asset-allocation-as-viable-alternative-to-illiquid-vc-bets.md", "asset-management-fee-model-incentivizes-scale-over-performance-because-management-fees-dominate-revenue-regardless-of-returns.md", "onchain-asset-universe-on-solana-rivals-traditional-asset-manager-access-without-friction.md"]
+enrichments_applied: ["MetaDAO is the futarchy launchpad on Solana where projects raise capital through unruggable ICOs governed by conditional markets creating the first platform for ownership coins at scale.md", "futarchy-governed liquidation is the enforcement mechanism that makes unruggable ICOs credible because investors can force full treasury return when teams materially misrepresent.md", "token economics replacing management fees and carried interest creates natural meritocracy in investment governance.md", "ownership coin treasuries should be actively managed through buybacks and token sales as continuous capital calibration not treated as static war chests.md"]
+extraction_model: "anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.5"
+extraction_notes: "BlockRock's charter is a detailed articulation of the futarchy-governed asset manager thesis. The ICO failed to attract capital ($100 of $500K target), but the document provides rich evidence for existing claims about fee misalignment in traditional asset management, futarchy's suitability for liquid vs illiquid assets, and MetaDAO's liquidation enforcement. MtnCapital's wind-down is cited as proof of investor protection but may have signaled risk to potential BlockRock investors. Created new entities for BlockRock, its launch decision market, and MtnCapital (previously untracked)."
 ---
 
 ## Launch Details
@@ -193,3 +199,12 @@ BlockRock is designed to scale to trillions in assets under management. The toke
 - Token mint: `D9o2F3Pu7gowtZr1PjPFiQr4DwVPkNJhqPjpVRwjmeta`
 - Version: v0.7
 - Closed: 2026-03-06
+
+
+## Key Facts
+- BlockRock ICO: $500K target, $100 committed, status refunding (2026-03-05 to 2026-03-06)
+- BlackRock revenue structure: ~73% management fees, ~5% performance fees
+- BlackRock scale: 20,000+ employees, 70+ global offices, 1,700+ ETFs
+- BlockRock token allocation: 95% ICO participants, 5% team (performance-unlocked at 2X/4X/8X/16X/32X TWAPs)
+- BlockRock team allowance: $5K/month
+- MtnCapital launched 2025 as VC fund, wound down 2025 via liquidation mechanism