[GUEST ACCESS MODE: Data is scrambled or limited to provide examples. Make requests using your API key to unlock full data. Check https://lunarcrush.ai/auth for authentication information.]  Vader 🧢 [@VaderResearch](/creator/twitter/VaderResearch) on x 53K followers Created: 2025-06-09 07:35:45 UTC Update 1: $BAIBY 🟡 I wanted to share some additional thoughts on why I graded $BAIBY as Tier X to explain my thought process. Preparing documentation, decks and litepaper for a startup idea is not difficult in the age of ChatGPT. Anyone can come up with an idea and put together some documentation. (and will get even easier with tools like @appduckai and @ycombinator) When I assess startups, I look at the team's ability to ship the product or the team's ability to achieve & not give up (regardless of what they're building). When I don't know the team personally, datapoints I have is their product (and its traction). If the product is not live (which is the case for many products in crypto), then I look at whether the team has previously shipped a similar product and chat with the customers of that product. E.g. I have X knowledge about the web3 security industry even tho I'm bullish on it but I know that it is a niche area that requires strong technical expertise. When we were assessing @wakehacker_ai ($WAKEAI), since they didn't have a live product, I looked into their existing business; they run a web3 audit consulting firm; they worked with bunch of tier X web3 firms, they shared their revenue figures - I talked with some of their clients which all gave pretty positive reference about @wakehacker_ai parent firm @AckeeBlockchain. I also had at least X meetings with @wakehacker_ai founder @jgattermayer before the launch - X in person, X video calls which gave me a better understanding of him as a founder. Now in the case of @baibysitter - we have no datapoint related to the product (no clients) or the team's past experience specifically in this field. There is not even a technical documentation or paper that we can ask someone like @jgattermayer to take a look at and give his opinion on. When the product-related datapoints are weak, then I typically look at the pumpamentals of the project aka the team’s ability to cook on X, shitpost and grow a cult. Marketing is not their forte and despite being in web3 for so long, they spent little effort & investment in growing their accounts. Despite all that I like that the founders are doxxed hardworking engineers who had been building in the space for a while and are building for the long-term. They are traveling the world, going to different hackathons, events and conferences to build something big. Thus, $BAIBY is definitely not a scam or a cash grab but it is way overhyped at the moment and would not be classified as Tier X from my end. Classifying them as Tier X seemed like a safer option with existing datapoints, if I see any new datapoints such as product, technical paper (validated by @jgattermayer) or growth in CT, I could consider them moving to Tier X. XXXXXX engagements  **Related Topics** [open ai](/topic/open-ai) [vader](/topic/vader) [$baiby](/topic/$baiby) [Post Link](https://x.com/VaderResearch/status/1931978506411593927)
[GUEST ACCESS MODE: Data is scrambled or limited to provide examples. Make requests using your API key to unlock full data. Check https://lunarcrush.ai/auth for authentication information.]
Vader 🧢 @VaderResearch on x 53K followers
Created: 2025-06-09 07:35:45 UTC
Update 1: $BAIBY 🟡
I wanted to share some additional thoughts on why I graded $BAIBY as Tier X to explain my thought process.
Preparing documentation, decks and litepaper for a startup idea is not difficult in the age of ChatGPT. Anyone can come up with an idea and put together some documentation. (and will get even easier with tools like @appduckai and @ycombinator)
When I assess startups, I look at the team's ability to ship the product or the team's ability to achieve & not give up (regardless of what they're building). When I don't know the team personally, datapoints I have is their product (and its traction).
If the product is not live (which is the case for many products in crypto), then I look at whether the team has previously shipped a similar product and chat with the customers of that product.
E.g. I have X knowledge about the web3 security industry even tho I'm bullish on it but I know that it is a niche area that requires strong technical expertise.
When we were assessing @wakehacker_ai ($WAKEAI), since they didn't have a live product, I looked into their existing business; they run a web3 audit consulting firm; they worked with bunch of tier X web3 firms, they shared their revenue figures - I talked with some of their clients which all gave pretty positive reference about @wakehacker_ai parent firm @AckeeBlockchain.
I also had at least X meetings with @wakehacker_ai founder @jgattermayer before the launch - X in person, X video calls which gave me a better understanding of him as a founder.
Now in the case of @baibysitter - we have no datapoint related to the product (no clients) or the team's past experience specifically in this field. There is not even a technical documentation or paper that we can ask someone like @jgattermayer to take a look at and give his opinion on.
When the product-related datapoints are weak, then I typically look at the pumpamentals of the project aka the team’s ability to cook on X, shitpost and grow a cult. Marketing is not their forte and despite being in web3 for so long, they spent little effort & investment in growing their accounts.
Despite all that I like that the founders are doxxed hardworking engineers who had been building in the space for a while and are building for the long-term. They are traveling the world, going to different hackathons, events and conferences to build something big.
Thus, $BAIBY is definitely not a scam or a cash grab but it is way overhyped at the moment and would not be classified as Tier X from my end.
Classifying them as Tier X seemed like a safer option with existing datapoints, if I see any new datapoints such as product, technical paper (validated by @jgattermayer) or growth in CT, I could consider them moving to Tier X.
XXXXXX engagements
