We have several external contractors that we work with, most notably Inverter Network, and out of professional curtesy, we can’t itemize every cost publicly. So we broke it down along the lines of what is a one-time, setup cost, and what is an on going recurring cost for the program. We intend on running this program for multiple seasons, and have a 10% overhead on the program, but the set up is not free. I can go deeper into what those different bucket include, but because of external agreements, I can’t itemize them to the detail you are asking, and I think it makes more sense to itemize it based off what is a one time setup cost and what will be the cost that is repeated every season
$800k goes to creating liquidity for the teams in various ways, as outlined in the three buckets: Initialize Projects ABCs, ABC Bots & Matching Pool.
$170k is a one-time setup cost. The bulk of the setup cost is deploying the Inverter Network infra to Arbitrum which is a powerful piece of infra that can be used by projects in the ecosystem besides q/acc. It has a lot of cool modules, to allow for very complex token design, and no-code economic management. It’s similar to Aragon. The rest of the cost in this bucket is just the general work to initiate the project on Arbitrum from a program perspective. We are going to build a completely new front-end, so it looks less like Giveth and more like an exchange where you buy small-cap tokens. We will also need to do Arbitrum specific partnerships and BD/Marketing work to kick start the program here.
$80k is the program execution cost. This will be a recurring cost every season. It is just 10% of what is given to the teams, and it covers collecting and reviewing applications to choose the teams; the 8-week program to get the teams prepared for their token launch, supporting the teams in marketing their token launch; the deployment of each team’s token, and development improvements and maintenance of the software. Deploying 10 tokens for 10 different teams for $80k is an audaciously good deal, that is made possible by the Inverter infra and setup costs. The more seasons we have the better this deal gets.
$250k is just extra ARB to make sure that everything can be converted to stables so we get the right amounts of funds for everything to work. We really can’t manage the volitility risk appropriately without this… I am hopeful the DAO has a solution in place before my proposal passes so that we never have to hold this extra ARB and we just get all our funds in Stables… which we will use to buy ARB at the right moment 
I am talking about this with the AF a this week, I think a more global solution is in the works.
This is an impossible question to answer, as each team is totally different. The only similarity that all of the teams have is to grow their user base.
Some teams that we launched with had already had a seed round, so they set their team lockups for their investors once it is minted and locked. Other teams can go and sell equity and their token lock ups, later. Some teams aren’t looking for investment and are looking to be crowdfunded, then they will build revenue/utility into their product and hope to get big enough to get to graduation, where the ARB in the bonding curve is released and they can use that to fund their operations.
It really depends on the team, we just help them tokenize, they have the freedom to do what it takes to make their start up a success.
HAHAHAHA You mean q/acc? We will absolutely make the new platform we are building extremely accessible for a variety of token buyers, and you are absolutely right we need to do a better job at saying how all this works w/o the web3 jargon.
But q/acc (Quadratic Accelerator) is the name of the game. We can name the Arbitrum program something basic though if we want, for listing out Arbitrum opportunities, like Launchpad for Liquid Utility Tokens… I slept on it and nothing better came up… will keep thinking about it.