Crypto's "Marketing Aesthetics": Celebrity Coins, Blur Points and Solana's Rise

Author: YBB Capital Researcher Zeke

1. Celebrity Coins, from birth to marketing

With 23 years of persistence, Warren Buffett continued the charitable legacy of his deceased wife Susan Buffett, transforming the pursuit of a group of business elites into a globally striking "time auction", creating the most iconic "sky-high luncheon" model in the history of human charity.

The monetization of celebrity time is actually not uncommon in Web3. From Time New Bank in ancient times to Friend.tech, SocialFi has been explored for more than seven or eight years, but in most cases, there is little thunder or even raindrops. After all, the importance of speculative trading in the world on-chain is often greater than this "fragile social" established by Tokens. What most users really care about is not the exclusive insights shared by celebrities, but focus on the "quantity and price" of celebrities. In other words, for top celebrities, the profits of the SocialFi platform are too small and cumbersome, and for KOLs, the already scarce influence is both embarrassing and stupid in the SocialFi platform with transparent prices and few users.

The lack of precipitation is destined to not work on SocialFi for the time being, so the monetization path of celebrity values ​​in Web3 needs to be divided first, transitioned and then evolved. A paid subscription-based community and an X account with blue label, this kind of Web2 combination with precipitation is what KOL needs at present. The value conversion path of top celebrities has not been smooth enough, just like a large enterprise with tens of millions of goods waiting to be dumped. To B is not cost-effective, To C has no carrier.

From the monetization of time to the monetization of influence is the first step in the path exploration, and NFTs have played this carrier for a long time. But it is obvious that NFT emphasizes the characteristics of scarcity, fixed price sale and lack of liquidity, which cannot satisfy both buyers and sellers. This form of selling souvenirs failed temporarily after the BTC ecosystem was dull.

The value of celebrities needs a new carrier. Although the answer has long been hidden in the story between Musk and Doge, this matter still needs some opportunities. Last year, Pump.fun's coin issuance craze swept the currency circle. With the joint progress of the US presidential election, various privately issued presidential coins have appeared during this period. The super high increase and popularity have made some behind-the-scenes traders in the currency circle smell the opportunity. They can send real celebrities to issue coins through contract signing or inducing them to operate the rest. This sounds a bit similar to the cooperation model between MCN institutions and Internet celebrities, but the actual situation is extremely violent. From Caitlyn Jenner (a US Olympic decathlon champion and one of Trump’s top fans) JENNER to President Mile’s LIBRA. Start with a tweet and a vertically falling K-line is finished. The entire process can be as long as several days, and the harvest can be completed in less than a few hours. Then the script is often the big Vs on social media that start an emergency "investigation", and the coin issuing team posts to blame each other, and finally ends up in vain. The concept of celebrity coins was born in this mess.

But no matter what, this path has indeed become very clear. Meme, a low-threshold distribution channel, is perfect in terms of initial results. However, the popularity of celebrities Meme, who lacks intrinsic value, has disappeared. Where should we go after the PvP ends? The problem is transferred from carrier to permanent survival. AI Agent can tell you the future of mankind. RWA can describe a Hundred Trillion track. What story can celebrity coins tell?

Trump's answer is cliché. He wants to give away a "presidential time" to the top 220 holders of TRUMP, and the top 25 holders can also be invited to participate in the second day's special VIP tour of the White House. The value support of celebrity coins has rolled back to "time". In my opinion, this solution can save the short-term and urgent needs of token unlocking, but cannot support the long-term growth of token prices.

A good enough Meme should emphasize emotions and narrative rather than empowerment. The value of celebrity coins is not the opinions and time of celebrities, but the stories and emotions behind them. Trump's dinner invitation is more like selling a super expensive version of Social Token, and everything will disappear when presidential time is over. How to market TRUMP well, the encryption team behind Trump may be able to ask Minister Doge for advice. Doge is tied to Musk, SpaceX and Tesla. To The Moon is still a slogan engraved in the hearts of users in the currency circle. People's currency makes holders firmly believe that 1Doge=1U, challenging traditional finance is in line with the genes of encryption. In fact, every point is Musk using his own power to sell emotions to the public, even if most of these stories have not yet come true. There is still a long way to explore the marketing of celebrity coins. The memeization of personal influence should not be as rough as a tweet or a positive news. It is not hateful to make money from the currency circle, but at least you have to understand the currency circle first.

2. Evil dragon

Few people have mentioned this project Blur. I remember the last time I talked about it when Blast started the points system.

With the annihilation of NFT's narrative, many stories have become the past, but the imprint Pacman left on this circle will not disappear. Blur was able to kill the dragon in the past by relying on the three-pronged combination of "Points + zero handling fees, royalties + social fission", which completed the rural siege of the city with a PDD style. I don’t think any NFT player will forget about the orange logo that filled the entire Twitter on the day of the airdrop. From a marketing perspective, Blur's three-pronged axe is invincible. It not only defeated opponents that other NFT platforms dared not imagine, but also prompted many users who had never played NFT to join the score-making army, breaking multiple records in just a few months. Almost all Web3 projects since Blur have regarded this marketing template as the Bible.

At that time, NFT players who had suffered from OpenSea for a long time were applauding, but Blur eventually turned from a dragon-slaying boy to an evil dragon. Let me start by talking about it in a small way. Airdrop3 is the first time I have become disgusted with Web3 incentive activities. Blur uses a self-destructive approach to exchange for TVL and trading volume. I said at the beginning of the entire event that NFTs will accelerate death. The Bid For Airdrop mechanism encourages users to place orders but not actually purchases, resulting in a spiral decline in false demand and prices. The mechanism attracts arbitrage rather than real buyers. Once Blur's Token value collapses, all blue chips will be ruined together. Later, NFT's death, from my perspective, Blur's Bid motivation started, while Azuki's Elementals series was launched to the end. Of course, it is more due to the fact that NFT has never found a suitable path (Pudgy does not count).

Then Pacman launched the NFT lending protocol Blend and Ethereum Layer2 Blast. The strategy of these two agreements basically continues Blur's underlying strategy. Blend uses a loan point reward mechanism, and users can get airdrop points when participating in NFT mortgage loans, continuing the logic of "transaction is mining". Blast adopts the "deposit points + invitation points" model, and users can earn Blast native income and airdrop points by pledging ETH or stablecoins. The former's income logic relies on common income methods in the lending market such as lending interest and liquidation arbitrage. The latter is to put ETH into Lido and other DeFi protocols to pledge interest and generate income. Pacman builds a self-cycle crypto bank through ETH locked among the three, and the returns it returns to users are unequal. In addition to Blur's early years, the incentive activities for subsequent projects have basically announced the end of the airdrop era. Centralized points make all incentives a dark box, with custom rules and spontaneous points playing methods criticized by users.

What other consequences does the points system cause? First of all, there is false prosperity. When the reward is visualized, users will lock assets into various protocols in exchange for project tokens. Only projects can raise funds everywhere with these fake user data and ultra-high TVL, and discuss the matter. VCs who are used to measuring value by data will suffer heavy losses. The second point is to hinder innovation. Projects that are not as good as activities are done, and projects that are truly skilled but do not understand marketing are buried. The third point is the separation of liquidity. Really valuable assets are locked in various agreements just to play this game that I thought I would not lose. The fourth and most important point is that when the points system is launched, a large number of studios, retail investors and whales pour in just to compete for a small piece of cake. Either compete for quantity or capital, the per capita distribution of retail investors is so small that it is difficult to make up for Gas. The era of airdrops has truly ended.

Nowadays, the points system is still the mainstream model in Web3. "Point Mining" has led to the flood of speculative culture, and Point Market has magnified this phenomenon. The incentives of airdrops have changed the essence of early users and communities. The airdrop era opened by Uni a few years ago was a good idea, which not only promoted DeFi Summer but also achieved real user retention and growth. In this era, every project Launch means a major withdrawal of funds and a "ghost town" will appear. The cancellation of this model will lead to a more passive situation. In a dilemma, users can only find new habitats.

3. Public chain

Ethereum relies on the development of technological paths and its persistence in decentralization in the wilderness era, which formed such a vast ecosystem later. But the path to success is different in every era. If it were ten years ago, who would have thought that Tencent could not replicate a short video platform, and Taobao was eventually eliminated by an e-commerce company with a single cut in the user interface. Also two years ago, I couldn't imagine Solana really going to trip over the giant elephant one day. But in fact, in this era of stagnation in the application layer, marketing and practicality are greater than the so-called technological beliefs.

Two days ago, EF released three articles to reiterate Ethereum's future vision and foundation management structure. The key information revealed is actually not complicated. First, EF's rights are decentralized, strategically intervene in projects when necessary, and voluntarily exit when unnecessary. Second, EF's leadership reorganization improves execution efficiency and strengthens communication with the community. The third is to maintain the technical path of typing and expanding capacity, and in addition, RISC-V is also exploring the replacement of EVM. Although the overall feeling is still a bit halal, EF has indeed put down its arrogant attitude.

But are these real problems with Ethereum? I can only say that it has something to do, but it is not absolutely. Some changes in the appeal mainly focus on users' dissatisfaction with EF and are unwilling to integrate into the secular world, which is also the root cause of Ethereum, and this person is naturally Vitalik. There is nothing wrong with not understanding or wanting to understand Meme, but the mistake is that Vitalik itself plays an absolute leading role in Ethereum. A project with a market value of 220 Billion is dominated by a young man with a somewhat willful and idealistic nature, and this person is unwilling to accept the mainstream culture in the current circle, so loneliness at this time is just an inevitable result. Fortunately, among the aloof Layer 2, there are still a spark of Base that can be compared with Solana. If I were a member of EF, I would definitely apply for some foreign aid from CB.

Putting aside the conspiracy theory perspective, CZ, a leader who also does not understand Meme, is trying his best to accept these concepts. During the period after being released from prison, he also brought out a hot track like DeSci, but the lack of the foundation of the Western basic market has made every prosperity of BNB a little short-lived.

Solana's victory lies in her lower posture. Solana after the SBF storm is no different from a child who has lost her parents' protection. Facing the giant Ethereum, it has to seize all opportunities. Starting with the Silly Dragon catalyst, to the various super Memes, Dapps, and PayFi later. In the past, we always joked that Solana is a stand-alone chain, but from the perspective of its tolerance and support for the ecosystem, it seems to be more decentralized.

It’s not that Pump.fun makes Solana turn over, but that Pump.fun can only be born on the soil of Solana. This is similar to Uni and Ethereum a few years ago. The first chain for non-technical users is the core concept of Solana marketing, which is civilian, easy to use and efficient. Today, when Crypto moves towards the popular Western users, pragmatism is paramount and long live the civilians. Solana is indeed suitable to be the first chain.

Conclusion

Regarding marketing stories, I omit NFT and GameFi here. If both can be revived in the future, I may make up for it. The narrative of the crypto-world has always evolved in the tearing between technological idealism and human greed. The rise of Token, the prosperity of projects, and the revival of public chains essentially originated from a successful marketing. In the past we listened to technical narratives, but now we need to integrate into the world.