So a big driver behind the pool was utilization fairness. We observed that NFT utilization rates were asymmetric, some folks earning 130%, others earning pennies. Making sure utilization was fair across individual NFTs was a real challenge. The pool solves that: you're betting on the provider as a whole, not whether your specific hardware got lucky on jobs.
On the returns question: we believe pool tokens will actually be superior long-term because of autocompounding. A direct RWA has a finite life—hardware degrades, eventually it's worthless. The pool is designed to be perpetual, continuously cycling into new equipment. Different value proposition.
On taxes: it's based on where the hardware physically sits, not where you are. FarmGPU is in CA, so there's no escaping CA tax on that equipment regardless of the ownership model. No location arbitrage available with RWAs structured this way. As more datacenters come online in different jurisdictions, that could change—but today, that's the reality.
Direct RWA sales will return—we focused on the pool first to meet specific challenges. The $2M raise is for enterprise-grade equipment. We've learned that consumer cards are difficult to stabilize at scale, and datacenter-grade cards are much more reliable for consistent utilization. The fractional model exists because most people can't drop $115k on a Pro6000 in whole.
Honestly, I think you're pointing at a broader challenge with RWAs in general, not something isolated to Silicon. It's probably why real sustainable RWAs on-chain don't really exist yet in a meaningful way. We're trying to solve some of the hard problems that have kept RWAs from working on-chain. Whether this becomes the model others follow, we'll see.
And if personal depreciation is core to your strategy, direct hardware ownership will return, we are doing the best we can with our team resources.