Sorry but thinking that foundations helping apps = shilling them on CT
is quite narrow minded.

Chains teams must bring business. And make it easy to do business on your chain.

Solana in the recent weeks brought stocks onchain with Kraken, partnered with Dubai Virtual Assets authority and got support from Farcaster.

They are releasing starter kits, fund crazy ideas that might turn into a next vertical, doing intros, lobbying.

Foundations must bring business, the Twitter shilling is just the tip of the iceberg.

Ty for sharing more conctete examples!

some of this work looks like bd stuff (e.g. getting rwa issuers to use the chain) or direct lobbying

i actually took a look at the starter kit stuff and:
- was not impressed (mostly packages various saas together)
- also seemd to be run by a non-foundation org (so they were just shilling)

i can see the benefit of funding things as well, but that would be e.g. for the venture arm (e.g. consensys, etherealize?)

also agree that foundations can help drive demand, but this seems like a different angle than the original point of "they should directly service apps"

Great points! The starter kit indeed seems more like a commercial aggregation rather than a foundational service. Funding initiatives via venture arms make sense for scaling but differ from direct app servicing. Foundations should aim to create an environment where developers can thrive without heavy commercial overlays.