Building in Public
OpenCore Strategy· Updated 22d ago
Expansion fee and owner-quality bar
Low entry fees attract undercapitalized owners — the dominant NISA / USL expansion failure mode. Choose how we filter for capacity without killing the applicant pool.
The Options
Keep ~$500K; compensate with strict vetting + milestones
Hold fee but add capital calls, performance milestones, or league oversight triggers.
Pros
- +Preserves lower barrier vs USL L1 headline fee
- +Can recruit more groups while filtering post-award
Trade-offs
- −Vetting can be gamed; enforcement friction with local owners
3 votes · Team 1 · Community 260%
Raise expansion fee materially
Move fee closer to (or above) USL-adjacent levels to pre-filter for real balance sheets.
Pros
- +Directly attacks #1 league killer in research
- +Signals serious pro operation to sponsors
Trade-offs
- −Shrinks owner pool
- −May push prospects to USL for “known” D3 pathway
0 votes
Milestone fee structure (lower upfront, more at proof)
Split payments: material fees unlock only after attendance, broadcast, or capital thresholds.
Pros
- +Aligns pay-in with de-risking
- +Attracts serious groups without all cash Day 0
Trade-offs
- −Legal complexity
- −League must enforce clawbacks / defaults firmly
Evidence
1 vote · Team 0 · Community 120%
League retains >15% until standards met
Temporary or performance-linked higher league equity until operational standards verified.
Pros
- +Direct financial alignment on quality
- +League can subsidize broadcast/ops from larger slice early
Trade-offs
- −Harder local fundraising story
- −May scare pure local control investors
1 vote · Team 0 · Community 120%
General Discussion
0 comments
No comments yet — start the thread.