The work starts before any contract

One business day after the discovery call, in writing. The clock starts at the call. What makes that speed possible is the reading that happens before it: your application describes what you are building, with any links you have, and an engineer has been through all of it before the conversation starts. Findings are only as specific as the material the engineer had to read, so send whatever exists; the pre-call read is a few senior hours over sampled paths, and the full review arrives as the first phase of the engagement.

Every proposal answers the same four questions: what we verified in your code and what it implies, what production requires phase by phase, what it costs and how long, and the first step we recommend. The same commercial terms travel with all of them: a range stated per phase that becomes a fixed price when the phase is commissioned, invoicing per delivered milestone, and IP that is yours by contract. The worked example on this page shows the structure as clients receive it; expect specific findings, and phases small enough to decide on one at a time.

A normal starting point. Describe the product, the users, and the constraints, and the proposal covers what belongs onchain, what does not, and what to build first. If you already hold an AI-built demo, the fast lane is our AI prototype to production practice. Working code makes the findings more specific, so send whatever exists, but an idea described well is enough for the call.

A description of what you are building, in your own words. A link makes the reading richer: a deployed demo, a repository, a product site; private code travels fine as a temporary read-only invite. An NDA is available from the first message and can cover anything you share: the description, the demo, the code. Specifications, pitch decks, and settled architecture can all wait, because the call exists to pull those out of your head. Expect five questions on it: what the product does today and which parts are real versus simulated, what it should become, chain and stack preferences, custody, compliance, and jurisdiction constraints, and the timeline and runway the phases must fit.

Protofire's process runs start to finish: you apply with a description of what you are building and any links you have, and an engineer reads it all before anyone schedules anything. We reply within one business day, by email or Telegram, to set up the discovery call, thirty to forty-five minutes with the engineer who did the reading and a business lead. The call covers what exists today, what it should become, and the constraints that shape the build: chain, custody, compliance, timeline, runway. One business day after that call you receive the written proposal. It opens with the facts we verified and their implications, then a phased plan to production, a per-phase range and timeline, and a recommended first step; it is specific to your project, readable without us in the room, and priced per phase so you can stop at any boundary. The IP terms travel in the same document: everything produced under the engagement transfers to you.

Most builds arrive at problems Protofire has solved in some form: 250+ projects across 60+ networks since 2016, with the contract lineages, deployment pipelines, and monitoring stacks from that work carrying over, and the relationships around them, from external auditors such as Certora and Pessimistic to the ecosystems we contribute to as a Safe Guardian, Chainlink core contributor, and Graph indexer operator. A senior in-house team also takes months to hire, while the first written proposal is in your inbox one business day after the discovery call. And when in-house fits your situation better, the proposal says so; our partner-choice guide compares the options in public.

The rest of the company. Our venture studio builds and funds its own products, so judgment about tokenomics, treasury, and go-to-market comes from people who run their own. Our infrastructure practice operates nodes, explorers, indexers, and vaults around the clock, so launches go out already instrumented, with someone on call. And a decade inside the ecosystems means the introductions a launch needs: auditors, foundations, grant programs, and integration partners.

No. A growing share of the work is for regulated financial companies: banks, fintechs, and asset managers that arrive with a business requirement, a tokenized product, a stablecoin, a custody flow, and need it mapped to the rules that apply and built to production. The engagement runs the same way: describe the requirement, an engineer reads it, and the proposal lays out the phases. Our published blueprints for regulated builds show that side of the practice.

Per phase, against written acceptance criteria. The proposal states a range and timeline for each phase; when you commission a phase, its price is fixed, and overruns inside the agreed scope are ours to absorb. Weekly demos run from the first weeks of the build, and invoicing follows delivered milestones. Delays on the client side move dates day for day without changing the price, and change orders are scoped and priced before the work starts. External audit fees are a pass-through: you pay the auditor directly, and the estimate appears in the proposal. Delivery closes with a hypercare window and a defect warranty, with their terms written into the same document.

You do, by contract. Code, smart contracts, keys, infrastructure, and documentation transfer with the engagement; handover is a line item in the final phase, with repositories transferred, keys rotated to accounts you control, and documentation delivered before the last invoice. The findings and fix lists you receive stay yours if we part ways.

You decide, on a document that stands on its own. For most teams the recommended opening move is the scoped production-readiness review: a full technical read of contracts, code, and infrastructure that ends in a prioritized fix list. The list does not expire if we part ways there. And when the reading shows a different kind of partner fits your situation better, the proposal names the type.