Web3 launchpads, initially for connecting projects with investors, now often function as capital-raising funnels. This trend prioritizes funding over product substance, flooding the market with underdeveloped projects and sidelining genuine innovation and builder support.
The platforms were first introduced to provide Web3 projects with a direct channel to early investors. However, their contemporary operation has frequently diverged from this goal, leading to a focus on immediate financial transactions over the cultivation of long-term project success. This operational shift has contributed to a market saturated with what are described as half-formed products. These projects enter the ecosystem without the foundational support required for builders to iterate, improve, and achieve sustainable growth. Consequently, the environment has become less about fostering groundbreaking technology and more about facilitating rapid, often superficial, funding rounds.
The scale of this activity indicates that the underlying infrastructure for token launches continues to expand. As of February 2025, the platform Virtuals Protocol alone had facilitated the launch of more than 17,000 AI agent tokens. This high volume of launches demonstrates a robust and active market for creating and distributing new digital assets. At the same time, this rapid proliferation raises questions within the industry regarding the long-term sustainability of these projects and the accountability of the launchpad platforms that bring them to market. The sheer number underscores a system geared for high-throughput token creation, not necessarily for the curation of viable, lasting ventures.
A significant symptom of this dynamic is the successful funding of projects that possess little to no tangible substance, which frequently culminates in failure. This pattern is not an anomaly but reflects a deeper, systemic issue within the industry. Launchpads have, in many cases, evolved into hollow funnels, mechanisms designed primarily to channel capital toward ideas without enforcing rigorous requirements for a functional product or a sound technical foundation. This model prioritizes the pitch and the fundraising event itself over the subsequent and more critical phases of product development, user acquisition, and business building.
This reality stands in contrast to the original purpose of launchpads. They were conceived as a crucial meeting point for builders and believers—a space where innovative teams could raise necessary funds and generate brand awareness. Simultaneously, they offered global investors an opportunity to gain early access to what they hoped would be promising new technologies. This model was intended to fill a significant gap in the ecosystem, making it easier for emerging teams to acquire both the capital and the community support essential for getting a project off the ground.
As the Web3 industry has matured, the limitations of this early model have become apparent. A large number of launchpads have remained narrowly focused on the fundraising aspect, failing to evolve alongside the market’s needs for more comprehensive support. In this respect, they are seen as operating like decentralized versions of “Shark Tank,” where the primary emphasis is on the financial pitch rather than the long-term potential for innovation. Instead of guiding and promoting technical advancement, this approach has effectively sidelined it as a core criterion for a project’s launch.
Many launchpads market themselves on being chain-agnostic, a quality they position as a neutral stance that allows any protocol to raise funds on their platform. While this approach offers maximum accessibility, it also fosters a lack of specific focus and uniform standards. This neutrality can transform the launchpad into a “free-for-all” arena. In such an environment, it becomes difficult for the most technologically sound or genuinely innovative projects to distinguish themselves from the noise and attract the right kind of support for sustained growth.
While some proponents argue that innovation should not be policed and that anyone should have the opportunity to fundraise, the absence of clear guardrails has tangible negative consequences. Without a focus on sophisticated technology or well-conceived token design principles, launchpads can become a cut-throat environment where few participants truly benefit. Investors are often left navigating a barrage of half-baked pitches and superficial hype cycles that lack substance. Concurrently, builders find themselves trying to raise capital without receiving the meaningful, structured support needed to turn an idea into a viable product.
This approach was more tenable for earlier versions of Web3 projects, which often prioritized rapid token distribution as a primary goal over long-term, sustainable growth. That model, however, is no longer considered beneficial in the current market. The period of easy wins and low-effort launches has diminished, partly due to increased regulatory scrutiny across the sector. The next generation of launchpads must therefore move beyond theoretical concepts and into concrete action, focusing on launching projects that already have real, demonstrable products.
From the developer’s side, the challenges are significant. Most builders must navigate a fragmented toolkit, often juggling three to four disconnected services to ship a single project. The process involves numerous complex considerations, including the construction of backends, management of ongoing costs, server hosting, and the implementation of security systems. This operational complexity creates substantial friction, and it is not uncommon for promising projects to stall before they can properly begin development.
Building a real product requires extensive work, yet traditional launchpads have narrowly focused on the capital-raising component. Capital alone does not resolve the operational bottlenecks that developers face. Builders, especially those operating without substantial financial backing or established industry pedigrees, require launchpads that provide comprehensive, end-to-end support to simplify the entire development and launch journey.
The guiding ethos of launchpads needs to shift toward a new principle: giving builders the tools they need to focus on their products. This means moving away from a model where builders must patch together the necessary scaffolding and infrastructure as they go. Instead, the platform should provide this foundational support, allowing development teams to concentrate their efforts on core product innovation and refinement.
Beyond providing better tooling, launchpads must evolve to enable developers to build genuinely powerful applications that solve real-world user problems. The function of a modern platform should extend beyond simply deploying token contracts. It must provide the infrastructure necessary for creating applications that demonstrate real utility, can achieve user adoption, and are capable of generating revenue. As 2025 has seen the rise of AI agents, projects are beginning to capitalize on this trend by first establishing a robust platform for building applications and only then creating a launchpad around those applications.
This application-first model creates a positive feedback loop. Successful applications drive adoption of the underlying platform, which in turn attracts more developers to build on it. This dynamic generates powerful network effects, resulting in an ecosystem of valuable applications, skilled builders, and engaged users who are collectively solving real problems at scale. For launchpads to be part of this solution, they must move past a singular focus on token distribution. While uniquely positioned to drive technical innovation, better projects will not emerge without better tools. The next generation of platforms must provide end-to-end support through the building and growing phases and offer clear incentives and guardrails to ensure the interests of all stakeholders are aligned. The views, thoughts, and opinions expressed are those of the author, Tim Hafner, founder and CEO of OpenServ, and are for general information purposes only. They are not intended as and should not be taken for legal or investment advice.
