0x7c621d59…d644sent to0x6f3e6272…223d·#17,659,954·view on Etherscan
Voting in favour but recommend somehow working in some advice from nounburger.eth as I’m familiar with their beverages in the Aussie market and feel this is important feedback:
> I commend "Public Good" for its achievements thus far, but I don't believe this is the best use of funds for taking the next step.
It appears to be more of paid enthusiasm rather than strategic allocation. There are no mandatory guidelines for the breweries regarding what needs to be brewed; they are encouraged to brew the IPA but not required. There is also no commitment beyond the initial run. The only commitment seems to be the production of 500 cans of 'beer' at a cost of $9 per can, while the actual production cost is no more than $1.5-2. Additionally, the beer is being sold by Narcose at a discounted price of $3.33 per can, resulting in a possible 8x markup on COGs, which is unheard of in the industry.
As someone with beverage companies, I would have preferred to see a consolidation of the number of breweries, with a greater allocation of funds to each. Sourcing brewers who specialize in certain styles, funding them for the creation of custom recipes for the 'Public Good' portfolio. Such an approach would result in a world-class CC0 beer range while still achieving expansion.
*sent from voter.wtf*