Cost and Timeline

Working numbers for execution. Cost: $750k to first pilot ($590k–$930k range). Timeline: 12 months ($10–14 month range). These are realistic, not optimistic.

Cost breakdown — first pilot

Item	Estimate
Vermont property counsel for NRD-lite template + first deployment	$80k–$120k
Outside securities counsel review	$50k–$80k
Tax counsel + 501(c)(3) formation	$50k–$100k
Smart contract development for Template C (first Tier 2 template)	$150k–$250k
Smart contract audits (two-firm dual-audit)	$150k–$250k
Wrapper entity formation + operational setup	$20k–$30k
KYC/treasury tooling and integration	$50k–$80k
Compliance officer (first 6 months)	$40k–$70k
KYC vendor (first year)	$30k–$50k
Pilot deployment costs (Template A or B; first Vermont property)	$40k–$80k
Indigenous-rights advocate (if first deployment is Template C)	$20k–$40k
Project management and coordination	$50k–$80k
Subtotal	$730k–$1,230k

Note: this includes building Template C audited core (most expensive Tier 2 work) since we’ll likely want it ready early. If Template C work is deferred to Year 2, the first-pilot cost drops to $590k–$930k working number $750k.

Cost breakdown — first 18 months (broader)

Item	Estimate
First pilot (Vermont, Template A or B)	$400k–$650k
Template C audited core development	$200k–$400k
First Template C deployment (or co-design preparation)	$300k–$500k
Methodology Foundation/Trust formation	$40k–$80k
Compliance and ongoing operational	$300k–$500k
Counsel work for second jurisdiction (Madagascar)	$80k–$120k
Smart contract audits (ongoing)	$100k–$200k
Marketing, communications, partner relations	$100k–$200k
Total first 18 months	$1.5M–$2.7M

Timeline breakdown — first pilot

Phase	Duration	Critical path?
Architecture pressure-testing (current)	4–6 weeks	Yes (this is happening now)
alignment-sequencing Stages 1–7	8–16 weeks	Yes
Vermont counsel engagement and template drafting	12–16 weeks	Yes
Outside securities counsel review	6–10 weeks	Parallel with template work
501(c)(3) formation (Landseed Conservation Trust)	12–20 weeks	Parallel
Smart contract development (if Template C in first cohort)	16–24 weeks	Yes if Tier 2
Smart contract audits (sequential, two-firm)	8–12 weeks	Yes if Tier 2
Wrapper entity formation	2–4 weeks	Critical path tail
Pilot property identification and engagement	8–16 weeks	Parallel
Pilot property closing	4–8 weeks	Critical path tail

Critical path: counsel engagement → template drafting → smart contract dev (if Tier 2) → audit → wrapper formation → property closing.

Realistic total: 10–14 months. Working number: 12 months.

If first pilot is Tier 1 only (Template A or B without Template C audited core), timeline shortens to 8–10 months.

Year-by-year cost trajectory

Year	Estimate
Year 1 (planning + first pilot)	$750k–$1.5M
Year 2 (additional pilots, more jurisdictions)	$1.0M–$1.8M
Year 3 (scaling)	$800k–$1.5M (decreasing per-property as templates amortize)
Year 4–5 (mature operation)	$500k–$800k/year ongoing operational

By Year 4–5, ongoing operational cost stabilizes; per-property deployments are mostly within the established cost structure.

Revenue trajectory (rough)

For comparison:

Year	Revenue estimate
Year 1	$0 (deployment year for first pilot; no revenue)
Year 2	First small distributions ($25k–$100k total)
Year 3	Modest distributions (5 properties × $50k average)
Year 4	Growing (15 properties × $75k average)
Year 5	$1M+ (20+ properties × $100k+ average)

These are rough numbers. Actual revenue depends on Earth Credit price discovery, methodology issuance volumes, and deployment pace. Year 4–5 is when revenue meaningfully starts; Years 1–3 are investment.

Funding implications

The architecture is not cash-flow positive in Years 1–3. Funding sources:

Source	Description
Grant funding	Foundations (climate, biodiversity, conservation) for early-stage architecture work
Mission-aligned investment	Investors who value the conservation thesis and accept long-term return
Partner-organization co-investment	NGOs that benefit from architecture deployment
Strategic partnerships	Corporations under TNFD/CSRD pressure who might fund methodology development
Methodology licensing (long-term)	Sovereign programs adopting EC-M for their own use

Funding plan is outside this repo’s scope but is implied by the cost trajectory.

Cost variability

These numbers have substantial uncertainty:

Risk to costs	Effect
Smart contract development scope creep	+$50k–$200k
Audit findings requiring remediation	+$30k–$100k per cycle
Counsel work in new jurisdictions taking longer	+$20k–$40k per jurisdiction
501(c)(3) formation delays	+$10k–$30k
Pilot property engagement extending	+$20k–$50k

Working numbers include modest contingency. Severe overrun would require funding-plan adjustment.

Timeline variability

Risk to timeline	Effect
alignment-sequencing extends	+4–12 weeks
Outside securities counsel surfaces architectural changes	+6–12 weeks
Smart contract audit findings	+4–8 weeks per cycle
501(c)(3) IRS processing delays	+8–16 weeks
Pilot property identification slow	+8–16 weeks
Per-jurisdiction counsel engagement	+8–16 weeks each

12-month working number includes modest buffer. Severe extension would require timeline communication and possibly scope adjustment.

Cost-driver analysis

The biggest cost drivers, in order:

1. Smart contract audits (~$300k–$500k for first-year audit needs)
2. Counsel work (~$200k–$400k for jurisdictional templates)
3. Smart contract development (~$150k–$250k for Template C audited core)
4. 501(c)(3) formation + tax counsel (~$100k–$200k)
5. Operational tooling and KYC (~$80k–$150k)

The graduated complexity (Tier 1 vs Tier 2) saves significant cost. If we deferred Template C entirely (no Tier 2 in Year 1), we’d save ~$400k–$700k in audit and development costs, deferring to Year 2.

Strategic question

A genuine strategic question: should the first pilot be Tier 1 (Vermont Template A or B) only, deferring Template C to Year 2?

Option	Pros	Cons
Tier 1 first; Template C in Year 2	Lower first-pilot cost; faster first deployment; learn from Tier 1 before Tier 2	Template C is the most strategically important template; deferring may delay impact
Tier 1 + Template C in parallel	Both available in Year 1; full template library	Higher cost; longer timeline; more complexity

Recommendation: Tier 1 first; Template C audited-core development in parallel during Year 1; first Template C deployment in Year 2.

This sequencing:

• Lower first-pilot cost (~$750k working)
• Faster first deployment (~12 months)
• Template C work proceeds in parallel; ready for Year 2 deployment
• Tier 1 deployment provides proof-of-architecture before Template C deployment risks

This is the proposed approach unless the co-architect or specific stakeholders push for Template C in first cohort.

Decision points

The execution path includes specific decision points:

Decision	When	Approver
Architecture approval (post-alignment-sequencing)	Month 0	Alex + the co-architect
Outside securities counsel finding (perimeter holds?)	Month 3	the co-architect + outside counsel
First-pilot property selection	Month 6	Alex + property counsel + the co-architect
Smart contract audit completion	Month 9	Alex + auditors
Wrapper entity formation	Month 10	Alex + the co-architect
First deployment goes live	Month 12	Pre-deployment self-check + Alex + the co-architect

If any decision is “no,” execution path adjusts.

What this document does NOT include

• Specific dollar commitments (those are funding decisions)
• Specific vendor selections (those are post-approval procurement decisions)
• Specific contract terms (those are post-approval contracting decisions)
• Specific deployment dates (those are post-deployment-self-check decisions)

This document is the planning baseline for cost and time. Actual execution will produce specific numbers and dates.